OPPAI ORACLE

Thricegreat wrote: Wed Jun 24, 2026 11:20 am

By the way, doesn't this sound like Jacques Ellul? Like god as the existence who transcends the dialectics.

Ellul is more about technological determinism and the failure of human resistance. Ginseigou doesn't fail to resist as she is both thesis and antithesis in one, which means there's no synthesis.

Thricegreat wrote: Wed Jun 24, 2026 11:20 am

Also considering a young girl vs adult & child, is "beyond the dialectic" somewhat like Utsuroi?

Not familiar with the concept myself, but with a google search I can tell it's about change. Ginseigou doesn't transform the order, she replaces it with something that isn't an order at all.

Sorry if I am being vague, I'm trying not to spoil the best parts.

Hans Sepp wrote: Wed Jun 24, 2026 12:08 pm

Thricegreat wrote: Wed Jun 24, 2026 11:20 am

By the way, doesn't this sound like Jacques Ellul? Like god as the existence who transcends the dialectics.

Ellul is more about technological determinism and the failure of human resistance. Ginseigou doesn't fail to resist as she is both thesis and antithesis in one, which means there's no synthesis.

He was also a Christian anarchist. What I wrote is more about that side of him. But there is still that point in his philosophy of technology.

I don't like Wikipedia but I couldn't find a better phrase than this:

> He did not seek to eliminate modern technology or technique but sought to change our perception of modern technology and technique to that of a tool rather than regulator of the status quo.

Thricegreat wrote: Wed Jun 24, 2026 11:20 am

Also considering a young girl vs adult & child, is "beyond the dialectic" somewhat like Utsuroi?

Not familiar with the concept myself, but with a google search I can tell it's about change. Ginseigou doesn't transform the order, she replaces it with something that isn't an order at all.

Maybe this post of mine could help you. Utsuroi is not that transformation. It means a Buddhistic teaching that everything has no real boundary so that nothing really exists.

For example from when to when is it spring? At what point does spring become summer? Or from where to where is it the earth and not outer space? Utsuroi means that continuous transformation. Without no real boundary. Like flower buds.

I thought of it because of Child vs Young girl vs Adult.


But I appreciate that you don't make a spoiler.

why does the sovereign have to be female? shouldn't intelligence be the only criteria for a sovereign? was it just clickbait to get the dirty lolicons on this site excited at the thought of a young girl ruling the world?

Thricegreat wrote: Wed Jun 24, 2026 12:25 pm

Maybe this post of mine could help you. Utsuroi is not that transformation. It means a Buddhistic teaching that everything has no real boundary so that nothing really exists.

For example from when to when is spring? At what point spring becomes summer? Or from where to where it is the earth and not outer space? Utsuroi means that continuous transformation. Without no real boundary. Like flower buds.

I thought of it because of Child vs Young girl vs Adult.

So, if my reading is correct. Utsuroi describes a state of continuous flux where boundaries dissolve? Interesting parallel, how do I put this? Ginseigou's presence creates a state where the usual categories and boundaries like innocent/combatant, moral/immoral, order/disorder are rendered meaningless. I'll say Ginseigou's transcendence of the constituted order mirrors the Buddhist concept of Utsuroi.

ccloverclub wrote: Thu Jun 25, 2026 1:19 am

why does the sovereign have to be female? shouldn't intelligence be the only criteria for a sovereign? was it just clickbait to get the dirty lolicons on this site excited at the thought of a young girl ruling the world?

That's funny, but nowhere did I mention intelligence.

Hans Sepp wrote: Thu Jun 25, 2026 3:26 am

That's funny, but nowhere did I mention intelligence.

i think i worded my reply poorly. just keep in mind im not familiar with the concept of the sovereign, and im just going off your words.
1. why should the sovereign be a young girl rather than a young boy? in your post, you only give a reason as to why the sovereign must be young, but not why she should be female.
2. if the sovereign must be a girl, what about her makes her more fit to become the sovereign over all other girls? i brought up intelligence because i assumed whoever has the highest IQ or is the most gifted should be the sovereign, since they’re making such important decisions.

ccloverclub wrote: Thu Jun 25, 2026 8:41 pm

1. why should the sovereign be a young girl rather than a young boy? in your post, you only give a reason as to why the sovereign must be young, but not why she should be female.

The young girl represents unmediated decision-making capacity, which means her will manifests directly as reality without passing through institutional systems or intermediaries. Unlike boys who are absorbed into established administrative structures, the young girl exists as pure constituent power and fundamental decision-making authority prior to any existing order.

ccloverclub wrote: Thu Jun 25, 2026 8:41 pm

2. if the sovereign must be a girl, what about her makes her more fit to become the sovereign over all other girls? i brought up intelligence because i assumed whoever has the highest IQ or is the most gifted should be the sovereign, since they’re making such important decisions.

Intelligence as traditionally measured (IQ, academic achievement) is not the determining factor. A girl is not sovereign because she's the smartest or most talented girl in the world. Rather, her sovereign status arises not from exceptional qualities within the established order, but from her absolute capacity to suspend, create, or dictate the very categories and hierarchies that define intelligence and accomplishment.

ccloverclub wrote: Thu Jun 25, 2026 8:41 pm

Hans Sepp wrote: Thu Jun 25, 2026 3:26 am

That's funny, but nowhere did I mention intelligence.

i think i worded my reply poorly. just keep in mind im not familiar with the concept of the sovereign, and im just going off your words.
1. why should the sovereign be a young girl rather than a young boy? in your post, you only give a reason as to why the sovereign must be young, but not why she should be female.
2. if the sovereign must be a girl, what about her makes her more fit to become the sovereign over all other girls? i brought up intelligence because i assumed whoever has the highest IQ or is the most gifted should be the sovereign, since they’re making such important decisions.

It's rather a symbol than a living human being. It just means that the sovereign is Dionysian.

Thricegreat wrote: Fri Jun 26, 2026 1:23 am

It's rather a symbol than a living human being. It just means that the sovereign is Dionysian.

I hate aesthetics arguments like this, because what Schmitt and I describe are not symbolics.

Hans Sepp wrote: Fri Jun 26, 2026 9:44 am

Thricegreat wrote: Fri Jun 26, 2026 1:23 am

It's rather a symbol than a living human being. It just means that the sovereign is Dionysian.

I hate aesthetics arguments like this, because what Schmitt and I describe are not symbolics.

I knew you will react like this and I wrote it expecting you will correct that part.

By the way my position is that symbols are as real as living human beings. But I think this is not a thread for that. So I will not write long.

Thricegreat wrote: Fri Jun 26, 2026 9:49 am

my position is that symbols are as real as living human beings. But I think this is not a thread for that

Could be worth discussing. Are you going to make a separate thread for that?