Suicide note, blew his brains out in Harvard, Excerpts

Share your experiences with the opposite sex. Suggest ways to improve your success. Analyze the behavior of females in real life and online. Rant and rave about females. Show the importance of looks pertaining to attracting females and other social situations. Discuss aesthetics and the science of attractiveness. Exchange health, nutrition and looksmaxing tips.

Image

Mitchell Heisman, a 35 year old nihilist who held a bachelor's degree in psychology from Albany University. His suicide note was notable due to its unconventional format; at 1,905 pages, spanning topics concerning (and not limited to) human nature, society, religion, technology and science, the suicide "note" was more akin to a grand philosophical tome. Heisman published his book, Suicide Note, online for free download within a day of finally shooting himself on the Harvard University Campus.


www.suicidenote.info






Ultimately, this is an experiment in nihilism. Every word, every thought, and every emotion come back to one core problem: life is meaningless. The experiment in nihilism is to seek out and expose every illusion and every myth, wherever it may lead, no matter what, even if it kills us.


My most basic assumption was that life is meaningless and that I am an animal-machine.


My entire way of looking at world has centered around the Darwinian observation that human beings are material
things. If there is no ultimate dividing line between the human and material world, then all subjective mental
experience is explicable in terms of underlying material processes.


From a very early age, I found that interpreting human beings and my own subjective experience in material,
physical terms had a genuine, empirical truth that could not dismissed.


This means, for example, viewing humans, and especially my own subjective experience, by
the standards of physics. From a materialist, Darwinist standpoint, I and every other human is an animal and a
material object. All emotions, whether joy or misery, elation or depression, are rooted in behavior that proved to be
genetically adaptive for animal ancestors.


The decisive turn that made me different, or consummated my self-destructive difference from others,
was really this experiment on myself where I systematically interpreted all subjective experience: emotions, experiences, intuitions, instincts as physical material; not better or worse than any other physical material. This experiment, in its conception, amounts to a definition of disillusionment.



The attempt to root out myths leads to rooting out the roots of myths: emotions. Emotions are the root of beliefs. To
destroy all beliefs, all belief in emotion must be destroyed. After systematically interpreting my emotions are material processes for at least a year and a half, the cause of life simply lost its cogency.



I became unable to spontaneously believe anything. The entire procedure then amounted to the attempt to generate
spontaneity in a mechanical way. I was unable to regain a spontaneous belief in life and my efforts to do so amounted to a program to artificially produce or mechanize spontaneity. At some point, I simply gave up, not because I thought it could not be done, but because but my belief in the conventional rightness of “life”, or any end, became unbelievable.

There was a manifest gulf between the way my emotions worked and the way my intellect made sense of the world.
The entire original experiment was an attempt to remedy this gulf. When I say that I do not believe in my emotions, I
don’t meant that I don’t have them; I mean that I do not accord them any ultimate meaning or significance. Darwin’s
The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals demonstrates why: emotions and instincts are the product of evolutionary adaptations that happened to be adaptive for generations of ancestors.


I do not believe in my emotions, however much I continue to be driven by them. This, on a human level, this is what
nihilism or unbelief means.

After exploring an unadulterated materialistic view, life lost its cogency for me. I have become disenchanted and
have lost spontaneous naivety to an extent that all efforts to regain the cause of life ring hollow and fall flat.

The experiment in nihilism is a test of what I really do or do not believe. If it is the case that emotions are former
genetic adaptations or illusions of an evolutionary inheritance, the chance products of a particular course of
natural selection, then there is no reason to assume that they are guides beyond their original adaptive functions. This also means that everyone else and their emotions are also treatable as physical material.


Since I don’t believe in my emotions in an ultimate sense, I can attempt to manipulate them intelligently. I do not think I am a fundamentally less emotional than other people but I am less inclined to spontaneously believe in my emotions; I do not accord them any ultimate significance. Emotions are products of a particular heritage of evolutionary adaptation that do not have any absolute meaning in themselves. Yet if I really was devoid of emotion I would already be dead (instead of writing about death) because it is emotions, not reason, that drive the preference for life over death (and even willing death embodies the contradiction of being willed by life).




Yet over the course of this self-experiment, in radically questioning everything and reconciling all experience to this
best, most educated guess at material reality, two interrelated dilemmas arose. First, upholding self-honesty
led to making no exceptions to interpreting all as physical materialism, i.e. no exceptions for events such as “The
Holocaust”. Secondly, partly because of the very success interpreting all as material, I eventually questioned the
nature of the exceptions I made for myself. The iota of faith that make even programmatic selfishness possible, even that I lost.



Liberals are not at all fully nihilistic. In part, there is the practical belief in values vaguely corresponding to human
rights. But more fundamentally, “secularists” implicitly believe in a religion of the common emotions. They
generally believe that meaning is to be found in the material, biochemical processes that humans experience as emotions. They generally believe that it actually means something when these old biological mechanisms produce the familiar emotional routines.


While one may feel compassion, does this mean that one lacks the capacity to discipline one’s self from being mastered by that impulse. That people are mastered by such impulses is only another confirmation of Darwin’s insight that humans are animals. Most humans are driven overwhelmingly by instinct and emotion.


From a Darwinistic view, every capacity for emotion evolved as a product of genetic adaptation. Emotions, then,
are biochemical-based illusions that evolved to propagate genes. Pleasure, happiness, emotions, and desire: these are the evolutionary tricks that promoted the survival of our ancestors. The “happiness” and “sadness” of present day humans are the genetically adaptations of generations of ancestors.


This is “happiness”, the great goal of humanity has bee striving for: a particular configuration of biochemical
reactions. Why, not, then, drug one’s self into a state of “happiness”? If evolution had taken a different turn at some
early point, a completely different configuration of stimuli would produce biochemical reactions of “happiness”. It just so happens, however, that evolutionary path taken by innumerable ancestors yields these particular, incidental,
prejudices of human nature.


Wild, untamed sexual passion can clearly be adaptive for propagating the selfish genes. The genetic program for these “romantic” behaviors, like clockwork, are passed on, generation after generation. Ancestor after ancestor executed the same genetic program for romantic sexual passion, and contemporary humans are only repeating the script. The entire catalog of romantic behaviors from love to selective altruism has its basics encoded in the code of the selfish genes.


For some, the meaninglessness gleaned from a scientific view of life leads to nausea, angst, and nihilistic despair. I
reject this attitude on the grounds that nausea, angst, and nihilistic despair also originate in material reactions in the brain. What does despair mean to someone who interprets that emotion as a chemical reaction in the brain? The process of disillusionment can also be disillusioned and deaestheticized.



How ironic if the darwinian shit would show to be COMPLETE BULLSHIT and this guy is now living his "next life" as a worm :lol:
PostThis post by cats was deleted by puanewb on Thu Mar 10, 2016 11:26 am.
Reason: Requested via PM



I forget how far behind Nihilists are. What a retarded philosophy. Emotions are meaningless? Guess thats why you killed yourself you depressed fuck
Absent-minded intellectual



Chief Beef wrote:I forget how far behind Nihilists are. What a retarded philosophy. Emotions are meaningless? Guess thats why you killed yourself you depressed fuck


good point

Pip-Boy 3000 wrote:What a waste of a good hair line.


this. he should have exhausted all of his resources and had a bunch of fun first at least

I skimmed through it, great read, very logical evaluation of life, the past, and the future. I already thought most of the things he writes about, but there were some new ways of perceiving things I had not considered, like the fact that even though there is not a God or original designer, we are evolving towards creating god through technology and the singularity, like there will be an omnipotent AI that will be able to create things at incomprehensible speed, it could make scientific advances and inventions in 2 seconds in what would take us two hundred years.

BTW his dad died when he was 12 and he cites that as the precursor to his descent into philosophical nihilism.
Earth's sole legacy will be a very slight increase (0.01%) of the solar metallicity.

life is meaningless, there is no arguing around it.

the only point is to maximize your dopamine rushes while still alive, because that is the only thing that is real & feels good.

so sex, drugs & good food = the meaning of life
Escort crew
Workcel crew
Oldcel crew

EscortAddict wrote:life is meaningless, there is no arguing around it.

the only point is to maximize your dopamine rushes while still alive, because that is the only thing that is real & feels good.

so sex, drugs & good food = the meaning of life


Ya, this is fairly obvious to nihilists, makes you wonder why this guy gave up on dopamine rushes in favor of some "philosophically honest" termination of meaningless life. He is a philosophy-cel in the truest sense, fucked his mind over by deciding that since life is just physical/material processes, it is not worth living.

Why couldn't he just be a normal animal-machine and enjoy life for what it's worth.

Pretty much everyone with more than two brain cells is a nihilist. Lol @ people who believe in free will. :lol:
Whimminz reactions when I try to be more "confident":
Image

IncelExecutioner wrote:Why couldn't he just be a normal animal-machine and enjoy life for what it's worth.


B/c there's no such thing as free will. He didn't make a "decision". Nature decided for him.

Did you make a decision to be incel?

Great Socrates quote at the beginning of his text:

Ordinary people seem not to realize that those who really apply themselves in the right way to philosophy are directly and of their own accord preparing themselves for dying and death. If this is true, and they have actually been looking forward to death all their lives, it would of course be absurd to be troubled when the thing comes for which they have so long been preparing and looking forward.

—SOCRATES, PHAEDO

Anakind wrote:B/c there's no such thing as free will. He didn't make a "decision". Nature decided for him.

Did you make a decision to be incel?


I think you're extrapolating "determinism" from physical/biology-reductionist nihilism which is not entirely accurate. His point is not that he has no decision but to kill himself, it's that it wouldn't make a difference whether he does or doesn't, and due this fact, his life is inherently invalidated from meaning, and so he kills himself.

If anything the guy is somewhat against determinism as he claims that we are inventing god through greater technology, allowing us to master our environment and biology. But he claims this still doesn't creating meaning. I.e. an infinitely intelligent AI and medical advances that allow immortality still wouldn't give meaning to life.

IncelExecutioner wrote:If anything the guy is somewhat against determinism as he claims that we are inventing god through greater technology, allowing us to master our environment and biology. But he claims this still doesn't creating meaning. I.e. an infinitely intelligent AI and medical advances that allow immortality still wouldn't give meaning to life.


That's not an argument against determinism.

Anakind wrote:That's not an argument against determinism.


Why not? Once technology and virtual reality advances to unlimited potential, we will basically be able to do whatever we want. Seems pretty non-deterministic to me.

IncelExecutioner wrote:
Anakind wrote:That's not an argument against determinism.


Why not? Once technology and virtual reality advances to unlimited potential, we will basically be able to do whatever we want. Seems pretty non-deterministic to me.


Having more options doesn't mean the choice you will take in the end is any less determined than if you had fewer choices.

you dont understand determinism if you think this would change anything

EscortAddict wrote:Having more options doesn't mean the choice you will take in the end is any less determined than if you had fewer choices.

you dont understand determinism if you think this would change anything


I guess I don't see determinism as an important concept in the future. Seems kinda overly-philosophical and semantic to me. Nihilism in itself is legit because no meaning for life can actually be verified.

IncelExecutioner wrote:
Anakind wrote:That's not an argument against determinism.


Why not? Once technology and virtual reality advances to unlimited potential, we will basically be able to do whatever we want. Seems pretty non-deterministic to me.


What the fuck are you talking about? There's no such thing as "unlimited potential". Do whatever we want? Seems like you invalidated the laws of physics. :lol:

cats wrote:tl;dr


You're missing out, this seems well thought out.

Liberals are not at all fully nihilistic. In part, there is the
practical belief in values vaguely corresponding to human
rights. But more fundamentally, “secularists” implicitly
believe in a religion of the common emotions. They
generally believe that meaning is to be found in the
material, biochemical processes that humans experience as
emotions. They generally believe that it actually means
something when these old biological mechanisms produce
the familiar emotional routines.


This is legit.
Image

Anakind wrote:
What the fuck are you talking about? There's no such thing as "unlimited potential". Do whatever we want? Seems like you invalidated the laws of physics. :lol:


Just because we have to obey the laws of physics doesn't mean we have no free will. I don't understand the jump you make to "no free will". It's not justified in my opinion.

IncelExecutioner wrote:I skimmed through it, great read, very logical evaluation of life, the past, and the future. I already thought most of the things he writes about, but there were some new ways of perceiving things I had not considered, like the fact that even though there is not a God or original designer, we are evolving towards creating god through technology and the singularity, like there will be an omnipotent AI that will be able to create things at incomprehensible speed, it could make scientific advances and inventions in 2 seconds in what would take us two hundred years.

BTW his dad died when he was 12 and he cites that as the precursor to his descent into philosophical nihilism.


what if that already happened

Image
Image

IncelExecutioner wrote:
Anakind wrote:
What the fuck are you talking about? There's no such thing as "unlimited potential". Do whatever we want? Seems like you invalidated the laws of physics. :lol:


Just because we have to obey the laws of physics doesn't mean we have no free will. I don't understand the jump you make to "no free will". It's not justified in my opinion.


LOL

a) the universe follows a strict set of rules, most important the rule of causility, cause & effect

b) we have free will

these two are not compatible

IncelExecutioner wrote:
Anakind wrote:
What the fuck are you talking about? There's no such thing as "unlimited potential". Do whatever we want? Seems like you invalidated the laws of physics. :lol:


Just because we have to obey the laws of physics doesn't mean we have no free will. I don't understand the jump you make to "no free will". It's not justified in my opinion.


You live under the illusion that YOU (your consciousness) make your own decisions just b/c you're aware of your decisions. What you do is the result of nothing else but bio-chemical reactions in your brain. So please tell me how YOU controlled those melatonin levels that made you go to sleep last night. :lol:

Anakind wrote:
You live under the illusion that YOU (your consciousness) make your own decisions just b/c you're aware of your decisions. What you do is the result of nothing else but bio-chemical reactions in your brain. So please tell me how YOU controlled those melatonin levels that made you go to sleep last night. :lol:


The universe follows a set of rules, but it's often chaotic. I don't think you can say that bio-chemical reactions control us, anymore than we control those chemical reactions through our generation of thoughts.

I just find this whole ideology of a lack of free-will to be too mental-masturbatory. It's obvious to every sane person that we decide many of our actions. There's a reason the guy who wrote this doesn't talk about free will and determinism, it's not an important concept.

IncelExecutioner wrote:
Anakind wrote:
You live under the illusion that YOU (your consciousness) make your own decisions just b/c you're aware of your decisions. What you do is the result of nothing else but bio-chemical reactions in your brain. So please tell me how YOU controlled those melatonin levels that made you go to sleep last night. :lol:


The universe follows a set of rules, but it's often chaotic. I don't think you can say that bio-chemical reactions control us, anymore than we control those chemical reactions through our generation of thoughts.

I just find this whole ideology of a lack of free-will to be too mental-masturbatory. It's obvious to every sane person that we decide many of our actions. There's a reason the guy who wrote this doesn't talk about free will and determinism, it's not an important concept.


just to point out that this is not legit:

if you was born in iraq/saudi arabia/other heavily religious country, you would not think like this today.

religious brainwashing would have resulted in you having a different mind, and different thougths today

you writing this, is a result of a liberated first world education.

but nothing of this was a result of your "free" will, it was a result of your environment shaping your brain in a certain way.
Next

Topic Tags

Return to Shitty Advice

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 109 guests