My answer to the question - II - the recipe

(continued)

42
42 is a reference to the Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy where someone built a machine to compute the answer to "The question". The answer was 42. After this they had to build a bigger machine to compute the answer to another question: 'What's "The question"?'

By saying that my answer used to be 42, I was just saying I used to think that "The question" was non-sense and "The answer" absolutely irrelevant.

By using "used to be" I was assuming I was back into believing that the question was valid. But the big new book is under intense study. It's Gilles Deleuze and his Thousand Plateaus. He is convincing me that the question is indeed irrelevant. Is he? Or is he just reformulating the question? I still don't know...

Recipe
For now, I'll post a recipe that you can use.

- 0.1 Non-applicability
I'll ask you to detach from your reality, to get absolutely crazy (in a psychiatric way). So, you'll most probably not want to follow me, but rather watch me on this freak show.

- 0.2 Courage
"You need guts" said Nietzsche.

What I say, and this is where I think Espinosa fails round, is that, there are no inner born forces whatsoever. We are all about reaction. You are a sum of reactions, nothing else. Espinosa defines happiness as the control of exterior forces (affections) and the nurturing of inner forces (where freewill can be born). I see him annhilating himself. I guess this is simple Nietzsche: Espinosa is a nihilist.

What I do not agree with Nietzsche is about his pseudo power.
But let me keep it simple, I think you don't "need" any guts. You are a reaction, and as such, either you are a reaction that does it, or not. Don't try to change yourself (regarding this "will"/detachment subject).

I never knew why I always had these guts, this tendency for detachment. But, generally, I see it as a problem more than a virtue (I'm not agreeing with Aristotle, and all that "virtue is in the middle" stuff).

- 0.3 - Control Warning
The game will always be around control. Generally, I'll tell you to be in control or to let it go.
The most important rule is: however many times I tell you (I'm talking to myself here) to lose control NEVER leave your safety rope back! This is a very important warning, otherwise you'll lose the game (this is Deleuze talking).

- 1.1 Destroy your references
Be multiple! Play with yourself, do not be yourself, go around, change, come back. Kill yourself! Love! Insult! insult what you love. Love what you insult. Destroy your references. Lose control.
Do you truly believe your references are bullshit? That's not enough!
Do you truly believe All references are bullshit? That's not enough.
You will only be ready when you understand that everything everywhere in and out of you can be _TRUE_NON-SENSE_ (you should end up thinking about word meaning, and if you think with words, and words have no meaning, oh baby, get ready).
Then, start believing everything again. And repeat. And repeat. Until you master the process (Deleuze talks about desubjectivation and designification).

- 1.2 Body
You are an organic machine. Lose control. Jump. Fall. Overstretch. Do it as in 1.1.

- 1.3 Emotion
You are an emotion machine. Lose control. Love. Hate. Overlove. Overhate. Do it as in 1.1.

- 2.0 Other Axis
References/Body/Emotions are only some of the possible axis you can play around!
You should lose control about anything inside and around you.
But define axis. As I understood (most probably wrong), Deleuze calls these: plans of consistency.
Try understanding where are you... and memorize the spots or stages!

- Setups
I'll call these memorized spots "Setups". Points in your plan of consistency. As if you were drawing yourself a roadmap. Your roadmap.

- Time Evolution
After building your roadmap, I would have only one question for you: what are you up to today? Find new stops on the map? Go back to old routes?
Do as you will and enjoy the trip.

(to be continued)

On the next post of this series I will try to explain and make what I just wrote a bit more real. The following posts will be of one of these types:
- Practical consequences of all this (Sartre wrote novels to do this)
- Connections between what I wrote and the names I mentioned on the first post