/lit/ - Literature

>>10641762
>It sounds like what you are saying is that it is mystical in language; he is after all a Gnostic.
Pic related is the glossary entry he has for God and totality, what part of his language is mystical?
>Is anyone getting anything out of this
Do you want people to raise their hands and say, "Yes, this work changed my life"? It's given words to disparate thoughts I've had, and it's exposed me to some ideas that I have not had.
>using it to build bigger things or become more powerful people?
Perhaps, we won't know until 20 or 30 years from now what changes the Millennial generation causes. Perhaps Nick Land, or Jordan Peterson, or icycalm, or some other thinker will have a more widespread impact, maybe there'll be a resurgence of some long-dead thinker. I don't know. You might value the changes a thinker has on the empirical world, others might value the way a thinker changes one's own thoughts and not care about what impact it has on them otherwise.
>to totally reject the world
To want to optimize all units within the world via love and fury is not rejection. He does advocate transcendence of a perfected world.
>just live in their head with Sophia like he does
if you did not gather that the point of the work is to get people to realize what is imperative, necessary, and requisite and then to perform those acts within the world then you did not understand or closely read it.
>Where's the power in a man that rejects the material world; the battlefield?
He does not advocate this; he does advocate transcendence of a perfected world. I'm certain that he recognizes where and how this battle must be fought.
>Aren't you decreasing your own people if you subscribed to such a thought.
"your own people" is an ethnocentric idea, REI is aryocentric