On suicide

(This is a feelzpost. If you prefer the dialectic version, read this instead.)

The first pivotal moment in my life was when I decided not to kill myself. I’d been lying in bed for about a week after burning myself out from four years of mind-over-matter striving, when matter kicked in and said “yeah about that…you have CFIDS now”. This was a devastating blow to my worldview, and it was compounded by the black pill: learning that nobody cares. When you’re at the bottom you learn quickly that relationships are a value proposition and you’re lucky to have someone in your life who’ll even listen to you bitch when you’re down. So I wanted to kill myself, but wanted to know why more. Starting over and reconstructing my world as an agnostic before dying was the obvious critical path.

It didn’t take long to become a Christian again. Everything follows from the prime mover argument and the historicity of Jesus’ resurrection. So then I was faced with the question of whether killing myself might displease God. I specifically remember a daydream where I told my very practical grandma “I think I want to kill myself,” and she replied, “Well, either do it or stop making a fuss about it.” This was likely my first real experience of intuition. My framework shifted, and suddenly I was aware of a new dimension of understanding, where I knew with an inexplicable, illogical confidence that suicide is wrong even though I wanted to do it and had no good arguments one way or another. Being forced to live, I chose to live as best as my damaged state would allow, having literally nothing better to do. The first task would be understanding, in order to fix whatever mistakes had caused the burnout.

In time I learned that the world is a giant conspiracy and everyone is in on it, and became angry. The lies, sins, and conceit seemed too big for a just god to tolerate. I wanted to burn the world and its evils. Having decided this, it was merely a matter of logistics to determine the best possible way. But I soon realized that no matter where you chop, the limb grows back. You can drop a nuke on Washington D.C. and the American people will rebuild it in three days, hold a deplorable candlelight vigil, and elect the exact same sorts of people back into office. Categorically speaking, there is no point in striking the world except to kill it entirely or as petty self-expression. So I did this stupid thing where I told God “I will not attack your creation unless you put me in front of the nuclear button, in which case I will consider that your divine blessing to wipe this thing clean.”

Fast-forward a couple of years, and I understood enough about life to get around my hangups. For this, I give the most credit (in order of importance) to Vox Day, Roissy/Heartiste, Koanic, Texas Arcane, Charles Murray, Ludwig von Mises, Steve Sailer, Kevin MacDonald, and Fred Reed. Though I owe a great debt to writers like C.S. Lewis and Ravi Zacharias, they were not particularly helpful in navigating bizarre, counter-intuitive confusopolies like the academic selection process, the sexual marketplace, or the hiring process, which all rely heavily on elaborate rationalizations, esoteric signaling, and exoteric deceit. Ask two university apologists, get three opinions, and none of them will be the correct one which is “to enter a peer group filtered for higher average fitness for an advanced society”.

During this time I developed my intuition haphazardly and discovered that it would be relatively easy to destroy the world. Obviously I won’t drop any hints, so even if you don’t believe this just imagine that I did believe it, which would be emotionally comparable to having the nuclear button at my fingertips. The sensation filled me with a weighty dread for the innumerable souls depending on my mercy. God has a sense of humor like you wouldn’t believe, because the same capacity which had prevented my suicide had given me incredible power and now prevented me from using it to create the Armageddon I craved. In light of Jesus’ sacrifice the only real option was forgiveness. The downstream effect of this choice was to realize (via post-facto rationalization) just how much credit I needed to take for the mess I’d put myself in, and it was a lot.

Responsibility for others is the power to decide whether to call in or write off their debts. Just as suicide had presented a binary choice between destruction and living the best possible life, so power over others gives me a binary choice between cutting them off or fostering the best possible relationship. Once you accept the concept of extreme ownership, the rest is just an optimization problem. I learned to call this power dynamic “charity”, and found that mutual self-sacrifice is the basis of all meaningful human relationships. The notions of human equality and homo economicus become laughable when compared to superlative power dynamics like understanding, sin, vengeance, and self-sacrifice. In truth, every interaction we have with others that doesn’t produce the best possible relationship is a sin against God and adds to our debt. The trick to dealing with other people is to understand that it’s a category error to be “wronged”. Forgiveness on my part is merely recognizing/reframing that when someone does evil to me it’s a sin because they’re damaging part of God’s creation.

This epiphany cured my addiction to masturbation. I haven’t done it since and it’s not even difficult. God answered my prayers to set me free from sexual dysfunction by writing a new pathway in my neural hardware that reroutes libido into purposeful action.

About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

38 Responses to On suicide

  1. HalHarrison says:

    >and it’s not even hard

  2. Boneflour says:

    This is a Tex Arcane post. Whether that’s good or bad is up to the metaphorical you.

    I like it though. Ya growing and doing shit and it’s cool to see. Right on, brotha.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      >This is a Tex Arcane post. Whether that’s good or bad is up to the metaphorical you.

      Tex’s shitposting was the original Tao. I am but a disciple sitting in the shade of his tree.

      >I like it though. Ya growing and doing shit and it’s cool to see. Right on, brotha.

      Thanks. It’s weird and nice to have people rooting for me.

  3. Tolian says:

    This is why the left loves narrative control so much and why radical ownership is so important. Once you take responsibility for everything the tactic of narrative control no longer works on you. For the enemy to use it they must concede that what they are doing is evil and wrong. Thats because for them to hurt you or commit sin their evil actions now have to cross a line that no resonable person would be willing too unless they were being attacked.

  4. Crazy TM says:

    I tell ya, I’m glad I realised the reasons when I was knee deep in an ocean that was crocodile and shark infested. I would of been eaten before drowned, scary they’re not the reasons I repented from such actions. The reasons were far more important and close to heart.

  5. Koanic says:

    You never had the power to destroy the world.

    • Mycroft Jones says:

      And there was me all ready to ask, “Aeoli buddy, where exactly is this big red button you decided not to push?” :-)

  6. ltf says:

    Your post reminded me of this guy, a Rushdoonaizer (lol) but not a rebel against God’s chastisement: http://forgetfuljust.tumblr.com/

    • Mycroft Jones says:

      Top kek. Added to my blogroll. Thanks. Bring back that desert shit!

      • glosoli says:

        Amen to that brother. When are we going to Skype?

        I’m hacked off at my church. One of the deacons, when asked by me, said: the law doesn’t apply to us any more. I pointed out Jesus’ own words on the subject. I re-read the Sermon on the Mount again last night, it made me realise the law applies even more rigorously that in the old covenant. And they never mention our part of the covenant: sticking with God’s laws, just a never-ending repetition of the fact we’re saved.

        @AP, nice post, but lost me at the end. I see masturbation as a way to avoid burning (keeps one from fornication and whores).

        • Aeoli Pera says:

          I don’t disagree, with a couple of reservations.

        • Mocheirge says:

          As you say, the law applies to us still. How can you ask for forgiveness if you don’t have a law to transgress? Too many people substitute their arbitrary emotions for law and demand apologies for lawfully virtuous acts while condoning sins in line with their feelz.

          • glosoli says:

            Yes. Also, so many pastors are weak men afraid to call out actual sins. Even in a congregation like mine full of pensioners. Pathetic. Boomers are merely the latest generation to take the easy rather than the narrow path. Let’s turn it around.

        • SirHamster says:

          I re-read the Sermon on the Mount again last night, it made me realise the law applies even more rigorously that in the old covenant.

          You’re noticing. How is there an old covenant if there is not a new covenant? How can one improve on the Law by being more rigorous?

          The new covenant is not based on rules. The law is written on the heart, so that the law is fulfilled at the source. Rules based is external, and there is not enough paper to write the rules needed to cover all situations.

          The end result is a man more righteous than the Pharisees – the Pharisees being experts at law and following rules. To pull from Taoism: “The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao”

          @AP, nice post, but lost me at the end. I see masturbation as a way to avoid burning (keeps one from fornication and whores).

          I used to wonder that, but I’ve just hit 2 months NOFAP. Thank God.

          • glosoli says:

            It’s sad when Churchians attempt to contradict Christ Himself:

            ‘Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. 18“For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. 19“Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.’

            Churchians reach for ‘least’, those who respect the covenant with Jehovah and truly attempt to live to the commandments and the Law reach for ‘great’. I just think we owe it to God to follow His rules, after what He’s done for us. Not pretend they are amorphous and imprecise. Sad.

            How did Paul make his comment about the holy day? Surely he ignored Jesus.
            (Question directed to anyone but the Churchian guy).

            • SirHamster says:

              It’s sad when Churchians attempt to contradict Christ Himself:

              Meaning that the one you called Churchian does not contradict Christ. What command have I taught you to break?

              I do not appeal to church traditions, but point only to the Bible and what it teaches. That is not Churchian. I do not claim authority over you, but only refer you to the authority you submitted to.

              But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

              The Law of Moses does not change. The Law of Moses is not the Perfect Law, but it points towards it. The Perfect Law also does not change.

              I just think we owe it to God to follow His rules, after what He’s done for us.

              Ex: “This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you.”

              Love is something that is greater than what rules can capture.

            • glosoli says:

              He’s talking to himself.

          • Mycroft Jones says:

            And the Hamsterlator pulls out the Pharisee card. Yes, Jesus actually did say to be MORE righteous than the Pharisees. When the Pharisees kept the law to the letter, Jesus said we should do likewise! So, why is “Pharisee” an insult? What was wrong with the Pharisees? According to Jesus, the problem was NOT that they were keeping the Law. The problem was that they were being all aspbergers and cruel about it. Everyone makes mistakes. The Pharisees mistakes were ones of the heart; their heart condition influenced how they interpreted the Law. And Jesus did give examples of the types of cruel interpretation that He objects to. So, Jesus criticized bad interpretation, and then the Fake Church interprets that as “woohoo, the Law is done away with, Hallelujah I’m washed in the blood of the lamb, so pass the pork chops!”

            • SirHamster says:

              And the Hamsterlator pulls out the Pharisee card.

              You jump straight to insult because you are a man of rhetoric and emotions.

              According to Jesus, the problem was NOT that they were keeping the Law. The problem was that they were being all aspbergers and cruel about it.

              Does “don’t copy their actions” sound like a good role model for “keeping the Law”?

              “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat, so do and observe whatever they tell you, but not the works they do. For they preach, but do not practice. They tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to move them with their finger. They do all their deeds to be seen by others. For they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long,

              What does it mean to “profane the Sabbath”?

              Or have you not read in the Law how on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath and are guiltless? I tell you, something greater than the temple is here. And if you had known what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless.

              Which is greater – the Law, or the Sons of God Jesus died to create?

              So, Jesus criticized bad interpretation, and then the Fake Church interprets that as “woohoo, the Law is done away with, Hallelujah I’m washed in the blood of the lamb, so pass the pork chops!”

              If your top criticism of the modern church is that some eat pork chops …

            • glosoli says:

              I thought Hamsterlator was a friendly sort of jibe?

              Why do all of his quotes confirm Mycroft’s point? Weird.

              ‘Which is greater – the Law, or the Sons of God Jesus died to create?’

              Wow, he thinks he’s a Son of God. I’m a humble sort of sinner, son of a man, so I vote ‘the Law is greater’ than me.

              ‘If your top criticism of the modern church is that some eat pork chops …’

              Hmm, he’s stupid, that was merely the rhetrorical parting shot, here’s the top criticism, which he somehow overlooked:

              ‘…and then the Fake Church interprets that as “woohoo, the Law is done away with, Hallelujah I’m washed in the blood of the lamb’.

              I wonder how long he will bang his head against the brick wall of men who realise that the new covenant has two sides to the deal, and we’ve totally failed on our side of things. Will he keep on banging away for days? Or will he humbly depart? Let’s see.

              I pray Jehovah will burn His laws on these weak peoples’ hearts and minds, before it is too late.

            • Mycroft Jones says:

              @glosoli, thank you. In Hamster’s case, his amygdala is already primed and on a short fuse because of a debate a couple years back on the topic of polygmy at Vox Day’s, called “Girl’s Gone Wild”. That thread was epic, I think we got up to over 2000 comments, spread across 2 threads. It took me several days to read it, I’ll only post the link if you really want it.

            • SirHamster says:

              In Hamster’s case, his amygdala is already primed and on a short fuse because of a debate a couple years back on the topic of polygmy at Vox Day’s, called “Girl’s Gone Wild”.

              That’s a lot of wrong details. Are you creating self-serving Fake Memories?

              The thread was not about the topic of polygamy. Vox posted on the SBC standing against government imposed gay marriage. Artisanal Toad popped up and derailed the thread with his pet theory that lesbian sex is acceptable as long as they have a common husband watching.

              “Girls Gone Wild” was a thread on someone’s else’s blog, and is not Vox’s.

              Your fake history is false witness. Do you correct the record, or double down?

            • Mycroft Jones says:

              Like I said, the Hamsters amygdala is primed. Now he’s denying that the debate boiled down, in the end, to polygamy. Such dishonesty, while nit-picking non-essential details.

            • wandering midwit says:

              So it is the amygdala that sets rats, monkeys, pricks, and humans to fire up/join status fights masked as battles for “truth,” “honesty,” “religion,” “faith,” and so on?

              How interesting a bunch of species…

              Specially that noble, slick instinct they have to form teams and go against an isolated dissenter/different (the dissent/difference can be imagined, if reality doesn’t lend any real excuse) one.

              Interesting species indeed — who’d even try to deny that.

            • SirHamster says:

              Passive aggressive avoidance of direct conflict. Quit acting like girls.

              Only item of interest left for me is this:

              “Wow, he thinks he’s a Son of God. I’m a humble sort of sinner, son of a man, so I vote ‘the Law is greater’ than me.”

              When God tells you to listen to his Beloved Son, He isn’t joking around.

              Jesus: “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.”

              Who gets to call a father, father? Sons and daughters of that father.

              Jesus: “If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?”

              Why does Jesus use Father imagery to describe how God gives to men who ask him? Why not use Master/Slave imagery if that is more appropriate?

              Master/Slave is is the Old Covenant – man relates to God as Subjects to their Lord. The New Covenant uses the language of family – children to our heavenly Father. When Jesus gives you a new identity, you must accept it.

              Jesus: “For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.”

              Is Jesus the Son of God? What does that make a brother of the Son of God?

              … I vote ‘the Law is greater’ than me.

              Did you forget you serve a King? Your vote doesn’t count. What counts is this:

              Jesus: “The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath”

              The Law of Moses and all divine instruction from the Prophets is for the sake of Man. The words are utterly important because they come from God; but Jesus didn’t die for the sake of the Law. He died to fulfill the Law to save Man.

              Jesus: “I did not come to abolish but to fulfill.”

              Through Jesus’s victory over sin and death, he creates Sons and Daughters for God the Father. You may not yet be comfortable thinking of yourself as a Son … but that is what you are and will become if you abide in Jesus. God is your Father. Do not reject God’s new identity for you.

            • glosoli says:

              ‘Which is greater – the Law, or the Sons of God Jesus died to create?’

              There is one Son of God, we are not worthy to be considered the same. Son versus son is a big difference.

              It doesn’t in any way change my answer: God’s law is far greater than we are, without it we are lost.

              https://www.etymonline.com/word/fulfill

              Jesus fulfilled the Law. Now it’s in our hearts. I think it’s more important that we adhere to that law now it’s inside our hearts, placed there by Jesus, and strengthened by the Holy Spirit.

              But we attempt to do so in a way that is righteous, like Jesus.

            • SirHamster says:

              There is one Son of God, we are not worthy to be considered the same. Son versus son is a big difference.

              Jesus: “And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’”

              However humble you wish to view yourself – you must see and treat the little ones around you who belong to Christ as Christ. Because that is how Christ is keeping score.

              Those whom the King elevates I may not and cannot deprecate.

              It doesn’t in any way change my answer: God’s law is far greater than we are, without it we are lost.

              God’s Law is great and we must study and know it. I am not asking you to change your answer, but I want you to recognize how much God loves and values the human beings who should be following that Law.

              Add on to what you already know to be true and good, with what is also true and good. You will understand in time. God is at work in you, and you will have abundant life.

            • glosoli says:

              Not to be picky, but they aren’t elevated, as they’re referred to as the ‘least’. That’s reality. We are elevated by helping ‘the least’ or by treating them with the same respect as we would treat our rulers or the wealthy, or maybe more. I know the first shall become the last, and vice versa, but even that acknowledges reality.

              All of the above is besides the point I was making: we’re not in the same league as Christ, for obvious reasons.

              But we are judged on being good loving neighbours, and we should not see neighbours suffering, even if they are ‘the least’, we should help them, as Christ did.

        • Mycroft Jones says:

          @glosoli sign in to Skype and see my message. Essentially, you set the time and I’ll be there. Looking forward to it.

  7. Pingback: Re: masturbation | Aeoli Pera

  8. wandering midwit says:

    (From Merriam Webster):

    esoteric: top 1% of look-ups
    exoteric: bottom 30% of searched words.

    like the academic selection process, the sexual marketplace, or the hiring process, which all rely heavily on elaborate rationalizations, esoteric signaling, and exoteric deceit

    Everything that doesn’t involve genuine love (willing, aware mutual self-sacrifice and compassion).
    Just everything.
    And, as fate has it, it seems the female mind doesn’t have “willing, aware mutual self-sacrifice and compassion” within its purview.

  9. bicebicebice says:

    “So I wanted to kill myself, but wanted to know why more. Starting over and reconstructing my world as an agnostic before dying was the obvious critical path.

    It didn’t take long to become a Christian again.”

    big if true

  10. Obediah says:

    >In time I learned that the world is a giant conspiracy and everyone is in on it
    >everyone is in on it

    They are, but they aren’t–but they are.
    But they aren’t.
    But they are.

    (But they aren’t)

    >The lies, sins, and conceit seemed too big for a just god to tolerate

    He wont.

    I wanted to burn the world and its evils.

    It will.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s