/lit/ - Literature

which paintings do you all personally consider the most beautiful?

So whose metaphysics is correct (or at least makes the most sense)?

https://www.discord.gg/ayqEGDp

I have converted 4 girls and counting to Christianity by dating them with the express purpose of either slut shaming them for their past and using the shame to get them to convert or getting the naive inexperienced ones to become so infatuated with me that they convert so they can be with me. Then once they've become integrated with a church to the point of not being able to simply abandon it, I dump them and move on to the next. So far the none of them have abandoned the Faith.

Is this wrong?

>>11410041
It's stealth Catholic apologetics.

>what is philosophy?
>philosophy is a way of life
>a search for wisdom
>dedication to truth
>but truth does not appear
>philosophical wisdom results in the knowledge that we have no knowledge
>what then does it mean to know yourself?
>how then does one know yourself?
>this is the question we have been cut off from
>can we come to emody truth if we cannot speak it?
>christianity and modernity have both supressed our natural means of accessing the answer to these questions
>occultism is nothing more than oppressed religions and philosophies
>much neoplatonic knowledge was lost following the rennaissance and protestant reformation
>but true philosophy has survived
>through the cults
>in the fringes
>as 'spirituality' as opposed to religion or philosophy
>yet there are the spiritual philosophers
>heralding the transformation of the subject
>this is what foucault sought in his late life to recover
>what he calls care of self
>the attention and purifications of the neoplatonists
>what hadot calls bios
>hegel's dialectical journey
>or phenomenological journey into self
>christian metanoia
>or reconciliation
>the supressed esoteric
>that which any oppressive totalitarian system must repress
>the impossibility of theoria
>the reality of praxis
>but this must be sublated
>and praxis become one with theoria
>the anthroprotechnics of sloterdijkian angels
>humans disguised as angels
>writing love letters to a God that doesn't exist
>impersonating or seeking that God
>strauss is correct on esotericism
>philosophy has consistently lied
>but this lying is necessary
>because it is impossible not to lie
>truth and lies in a non-moral sense, no?
>there is a unitary core, to all traditions, and that is the absent center, or that which is omnipresent with potentiality
>sunyata tiamat chora
>but one must believe in their own imaginative noetic capabilities
>at least if they want to create the next step
>philosophy is respectable occultism
>descartes was visited by an angel
>spinoza was the last ancient
>leibniz was the first modern
>hegel was a hermeticist
>marx was luciferian
>there are worlds
>but no World
>just me and you
>and him/her/it
>now let's shake up history
>by desiring nothing more than to be in the present

>>11064354
>Exactly, because it's probably going to be even worse in America than Europe.
this seems like a sad possiblity.

>Who knows, the Nazis seemed to do fairly well technologically. Historically even in the darkest times the West has always been good at at least one thing: war.

the nazis lost tho. and so did the soviets. and i think to myself, no military power is ever going to defeat the united states. which is true, as much as no military power could ever really defeat rome. it's just that rome eventually stopped being rome and some centuries of years later even byzantium was eventually conquered after shrinking down to a microstate. the western roman empire just disappeared into the various kingdoms and the army laid the foundations for feudalism.

war and crisis are good for tech but eventually some larger power can just absorb that also. even the abbasid caliphate winds up being wiped out by mongols. hubris and decadence are historical forces with a solid track record.

>Mass movements are the only way, for better or worse (definitely worse) they're the modus operandi of our era.
yeah. this too. it's one of those things where you wind up going, okay, so hegel is always right, but if that's what it means to be right then what does it matter? or spengler, or whatever mega-historical world-mind you want to think about to explain these things. in the end it's fire and blood.

the concepts of 'left' and 'right' just aren't coherent enough political projects. they work, they're there, they're a good way of thinking about mass cultural ideospheres, but they're not actionable in other-than-transcendental terms. it makes me think that deleuze had the right sense about a lot of this - dissolve yourself, don't get sucked into thinking you can be the Fist of Destiny. it doesn't work like that, you wind up arming powers that would be better left disarmed or unarmed. ressentiment cuts across both sides of the spectrum.

>>11064346
here's a pic rel for you anon.

Is there any literature on Jungianism applied to the self for self-therapy? (Aside from JBP)