If entropy and chaos in the universe are increasing,
Yet the LAWS of the universe remain somehow above it all,
Does that mean that order, in some way, is still higher?
What might it mean that chaos is synthetic?
If entropy and chaos in the universe are increasing,
Yet the LAWS of the universe remain somehow above it all,
Does that mean that order, in some way, is still higher?
What might it mean that chaos is synthetic?
The functioning of societies and economies is defined far more by systems than by individual people. Markets, laws, and shared values create an organized structure that distributes resources, opportunities, and influence. It is not particular individuals that hold the ultimate power, but rather the mechanisms of these systems themselves.
A system of market sharing, collective values, law enforcement, and mutual loyalty determines who becomes a billionaire and who remains a worker—even when the worker might be equally capable or, at times, even smarter. Often, circumstances combined with the flow of systemic forces elevate one person over another. In truth, only a small fraction of the population is extraordinarily talented, a small fraction is truly unwise, and the vast majority are just normal, simply moves with the currents that systems create.
Recognizing and understanding these systems—how they operate, evolve, and influence individuals—is the key to understanding society itself. Individual actions rarely shift the system in a significant way, but the system continuously shapes individuals, their opportunities, and their choices.
People accumulate influence and affect one another in small, intricate ways, but fear—of loss, of death, of being cast out—often prevents serious resistance to established systems. In many authoritarian contexts, the majority of people become blind to the illusion of shared participation, not realizing that the system serves itself rather than them.
Ultimately, the core insight is simple: systems govern people more than people govern systems, and seeing this truth is the first step toward understanding the world.
I prefer not thinking in such narrow categories —
in terms of like / dislike, good / bad, pleasant / unpleasant.
These sub-concepts are like plastic crutches that support our daily routines,
yet they never represent the true vastness.
Think broader.
Think more spaciously.
Emotion—not logic—that’s how post-capitalist, informational, networked societies are being driven (if not swung or dragged).
It’s sharpened, hyperbolized; it’s neither bad nor good—it’s just accelerated. Acceptance and adaptation, strategic corrections—that’s what should be done, not blaming or denying
The deeper tech goes, the bigger the split: fools get dumber, thinkers get sharper.
Maybe that’s how the human race begins to divide. But to truly understand the dumb and manipulate them efficiently, you’ve got to be dumb in some ways too.
The dumb are becoming bigger and getting massive loud, dumb leaders.
Smart ones need to adapt dumb’s loud tactics.
To create an evil, dark, yet correct sound, harmony or the minor scale is not as important as having those dark spectral elements for that purpose. The sound itself should come first.
Pure mathematical theory takes a backseat in this case. Pure feelings and experience come before any theory; you got to just try it. In many aspects of life, we need to go and try things and be honest with our feelings, putting theories and so-called research a little bit behind.
There’s no true enjoyment where everything is direct and devoid of any distances or elements that captivate the imagination.
Fame is an illusion. Not everyone will adore you; there will always be many people who don’t know you (especially today, when fame has become highly fragmented and polarized). Or there will always be people who hate you despite everything you’ve done.
Don’t think about others. Just do something useful for humanity, something that you genuinely enjoy and therefore has the energy to do and can do good. Find it, focus on it, and don’t overthink it.
How can we speak of morality if it is founded on empathy—on the shared experience of another’s suffering—when so many people are entirely devoid of this sense? It is as if they are deaf to it, in the same way some are blind to thinking and planning with perspective.
From afar, it benefits all of us to, if not love each other, at least stay respectful and neutral, and to find ways to cooperate. Yet there are those who refuse to see this, who have no desire to notice, and who barge ahead with their own truths, glued to “feels good” polarization; as many human being inevitably do just because it’s the easiest way.
But what kind of morality should we seek—one that does not rely on empathy, which many lack; and that does not depend on foresight, which many cannot perceive; yet also avoids the cult of strength, which leads only to self-destruction?
Isn’t morality, if seen from such a perspective, mostly an illusion of simply being good, an ideological abstraction?
One cannot feel the base of morality without power and laws backing it, because bad people will inevitably appear and try to exploit the good. “Do not expect pure morals, but rather expect balanced cooperation”
It is in the nature of any person to think about themselves first, so whatever motivates morality is ultimately an ideological thing, layered with many other influences in real life.
Any crowded website in conditions like today’s—(“money money money,” among other things)—will inevitably become a low quality. Paid propaganda and bots will seep in everywhere. The future does not belong to large platforms but to small, strong ones that stay true to providing the best quality information—not prioritizing money.
Relax and look inside yourself for the best version of who you are, ask what that version would do. In any situation.
Extrapolate this technique to whatever movements or ideas flowing through your journey—not to achieve godlike perfection, but at least to try and truly see, to really move forward.
It is the highest form of the reason, accessible to almost everyone, if only you are honest with yourself. Listen closely to what it reveals, summon the will to act in alignment with its guidance.
Settling down makes us easy to control. It feeds old feudal habits and today’s state–corporate order. If we didn’t choose a calm, well-fed life, we’d be harder to rule by people who drift into high office by chance.
We relax, and the seams split — first inside us, then around us. Humans became human by moving: walking, risking, learning. Movement made us flexible and free.
Settling brought fat, stagnation, and soft will. It helps the system more than it helps us. When I look at harm, I keep seeing the same root and the same hands: fear of change.
Life is a road, not a parking lot. Freedom needs movement — body, mind, spirit. Stop moving, and you become material for other people’s plans.
Freedom only in the hands of a fool becomes something bad. As anything else, tho: power, resources, anything.

Generally speaking, we’re stuck—if not degrading. Some small areas may be seeing progress, but overall our civilization has gained very little in recent decades.
Compare 70s, 80s, 90s. Such big jumps in progress even just visually. Cars, politics, technology.
Now check 00s, 10s, 20s. It’s all almost the same since start of 00s/end of 90s, but even worse. Internet, cars designs, no fresh political freedoms, etc.
Among the few new ideas, are you really sure you need all that AI slop in your life? Enshitification of everything, even american power?
It’s going to happen something really bad before people understand and reload.
Late stage capitalism’s core flaw is the relentless greedy pursuit of money and power, which erodes freedom. Without freedom, progress stalls; there’s no space or time to create.
Sometimes we still can make fancy things today, but most of them grew from a spirit of freedom and quality—not the corporate bloat that dominates too much.
That pursuit, that greed of capitalism, is something we need sometimes to speed things up. However, it’s also crucial to balance that with a proper understanding of human nature, society, the nature of restrictions and freedom.
And It’s always good to remember the downside of rapid advancement: pollution and entropy.
All this breed of bloggers and influencers—this whole rabble—is a very harmful phenomenon.
They think they are free and especially admirable for their supposed independence from TV, but in reality they are even worse, because they depend heavily on the crowd and on algorithms, which only brings even more turmoil into our society, they are not free.
Every such ‘million-follower’ is terrified above all of losing their audience, their hype in the algorithms, which by their very nature reward the most brazen stupidity.
People like that were in many ways the reason for today’s politics decline, when a crowd of fools, duped by the same fools, chose an even bigger fool. It’s all an ignoble, unfree chase for money and trend-chasing sycophancy. Instead of thinking and choosing what’s truly good, they churn out garbage to appease the crowd and the algorithms.

Intuition is, first and foremost, a feeling. It isn’t a mood or a whim, but a mind-sense—caught by opening inward, the way a faint scent is noticed before it’s named. Phenomenologically, it arrives pre-conceptually: a pressure toward “this is so” before reasons assemble. Epistemically, it is compressed knowledge—patterns distilled by memory, embodiment, and attention—unfolded later by analysis. In that sense intuition is a kind of time-reversed understanding: we know first; we explain after.
It sits just beyond ordinary consciousness yet within it, like the horizon is beyond you but still part of the sky you see. Because it is a feeling, it can be trained and it can mislead. Fear can masquerade as clarity; habit can echo as certainty. The task isn’t to worship intuition or to distrust it, but to calibrate it—through exposure to reality, honest feedback, and the discipline of asking, “What would make me wrong?”
Intuition is not the opposite of reason; it is reason’s scout. It ranges ahead, brings back a signal, and hands it to concepts for verification. When mature, it carries a signature: quiet, steady, un-dramatic. When immature, it shouts. Learn the difference, keep your attention open, and your intuitions become less like guesses and more like the mind’s sense of smell—subtle, swift, and surprisingly exact.
The opinions of foolish people shouldn’t worry an intelligent person. It’s like a seeing person relying on the advices of the blind. Big amount of people are blind in mind—mostly because they’re busy chasing money or pleasures. And usually they’re led by other big blind men whom luck tossed to the top; then they run into a wall or over a cliff and earn another bunch if suffering.
It’s easy to test if you’re not blind there: look at how well you do without luck. Always subtract the luck factor. Ask: on level ground, what can my mind and hands do—not just my luck? This links to character: honesty, open and critical mind, absence of greed, among others.
On a flat plain without fortune’s tilt, tomorrow’s line becomes visible.
There is cunning, there is skill, and there is luck. But a truly intelligent person is, first of all, open minded, flexible, seeking real, independent.
Time proves it—and the internet, which speeds everything up, proves it too.The crowd’s opinion isn’t worth much; they don’t know where they’re going. Any loud, random trend—pushed by an algorithm or by chance—turns them into easy targets. They start admiring trash simply because it’s big. But they don’t really see; they move like iron filings toward the loudest magnet of noise. That is the whole point.
Don’t bow to the crowd’s illusion. Numbers make them look mighty, but insight is scarce. It’s the classic engine-battle of humans: the big amount of stupid versus the small amount of smart.
I don’t like commercial ideas in art—all that hustle. Sell sell sell. Such elements destroy the essential spirit of art. It looks empty if freedom and independence are taken away, causing low-quality products and internal rot as a result. It’s not great or cool. Like, if you really need money, go make money. Why try to cheat with something as high as the matter of soul and art? Those are not about money at all.
You creators don’t get it. That stupid illusion, like everything must be sold — no, it’s just a temporary state of being human – all that capitalism thing, it’s not the essence.
Why not just create some actual commerce products to get paid and cover bills?
Money destroys art. The real proof is most of big today’s movies, which are stupid even with tons of money. They’re afraid to show real art and truth because they’re afraid of losing revenue. That fear is the dark side of commercialism in art. Pop music goes nowhere for the same reasons.
The thing is, most people just don’t care what they listen to or watch. As long as it’s either cheap trash or some high intellectual stuff, they’ll accept anything.
Real muse is killed by all that bustle and buzz.
Art is a feeling, a beautiful essence rising above all the grounded stuff like luxury and toilets.
I think you’d be better off making some commercial stuff if you need money, separate it, find time for it, like you find time do when eating or cleaning yourself. Feelings and thoughts are, by nature, higher than any basic stuff, they need freedom. You are not truly free when you are trying to sell.
“Nevertheless, the ancient Greeks already knew that logical thinking is a structured process, to some extent governed by certain laws. These laws can be described. Aristotle systematized syllogisms, and Euclid—geometry; however, many centuries passed before an era of progress in the study of logical thinking arrived again.”
Analyzing history, I cannot help but feel my heart grow cold as I recall the many centuries of ignorance and the enslavement of the human spirit—beginning roughly with the so-called “birth” of Christ, that is, with the establishment of ideas harmful to reason and freedom: the dogmatic religions of Christianity, Islam, and the like. Combined with the ideas and fixations of settled life, and later with the development of feudalism and other structures, this shut out the light of a happy life and the prospects of knowledge for many, many years.
In this connection I always think of one thing: surely there will come another “darkening”—whether from late stage capitalism, or from “too fast” accelerated technologies (technological progress always brings more freedom and happiness in distance, but at certain stages, it can lead to the exploitation and dishonest of many people). Or perhaps from something else, such as new ideas about power cults. After all, people in their nature tend to look to take as much as possible, which is like laziness: it’s a natural mechanism of energy to which we should somehow resist to maintain balance in everything else.
Seeing today how people, by and large, so easily “become enslaved,” how readily they submit to any foolishness, how rotten the whole system of today’s world has become, I grow all the more skeptical that times of darkness will not return—they will.
I have no doubt this is largely due to the ossification of the fundamental structures of human settlement and community, combined with a general tendency to seek the easiest path—though true ease lies not in what appears easiest at first, but in what proves easier when seen in perspective.
Therefore I ask everyone, insofar as possible: remain free; look around attentively; do not believe every pronouncement—even (and especially) if it is shouted loudly; do not settle in too rigidly or dogmatically; do not cement yourself to any single place or tribe; preserve flexibility and mobility—in body and in soul—so that it will be easier to resist and to develop.
And in the depths of your soul, always stay warm toward other people—more honestly: in your depths you are warm, after all; and then you will be warmer toward yourself and toward everyone, because ultimately we are something together, not apart.
New music is, first of all, new technology.
So we shouldn’t expect the same boom of new, classy styles and sounds as in the ’80s and ’90s: back then, the emergence of electronic music and computers was a rare event in its significance—almost like the discovery of electricity itself.
People were purely and brightly inspired by all those new sounds and possibilities, and they created brightly for the sake of music itself. That’s why in the ’80s and ’90s, and even a bit in the ’00s, there was so much good music.
Now everyone is a bit oversated—either shy about “repeating,” or heavily corrupted by commerce—and all that “evil” like social networks throws people off track.
But in music there is really only one thing: the music itself—the enjoyment of it and the discoveries it carries.
I think the sensible path for any not-stupid creator today is not to chase the invention of a “new sound” or the selling of sound, but simply to do what you truly like—really like—not just because it’s fashionable.