/lit/ - Literature

>>20237219
>Is he even known outside of 4chan?

René Guénon’s influence on the literary and intellectual life of his time has been recently documented in an impressive 1,200-page book by Xavier Accart, Guénon ou le renversement des clartés, which spans fifty years of French history and demonstrates the pervasive, if sometimes subterranean and implicit, impact of the works of the French metaphysician on personalities as diverse as André Gide, Simone Weil, Pierre Drieu la Rochelle, and Henri Bosco. Upon going through the pages of Accart’s impressive volume, one is literally astounded by the breadth, and sometimes the depth, of Guénon’s presence in the intellectual landscape of France between 1920 and 1970, a presence that a cursory, conventional consideration of the French intellectual history of the time would not betray. Who would suspect prima facie that Guénon’s works have been known and appreciated by personalities as diverse as André Breton and Charles de Gaulle?

>>19501485
seething hylic

>>19324944
>Guénon was reduced to alt-right and chan subc

René Guénon’s influence on the literary and intellectual life of his time has been recently documented in an impressive 1,200-page book by Xavier Accart, Guénon ou le renversement des clartés, which spans fifty years of French history and demonstrates the pervasive, if sometimes subterranean and implicit, impact of the works of the French metaphysician on personalities as diverse as André Gide, Simone Weil, Pierre Drieu la Rochelle, and Henri Bosco. Upon going through the pages of Accart’s impressive volume, one is literally astounded by the breadth, and sometimes the depth, of Guénon’s presence in the intellectual landscape of France between 1920 and 1970, a presence that a cursory, conventional consideration of the French intellectual history of the time would not betray. Who would suspect prima facie that Guénon’s works have been known and appreciated by personalities as diverse as André Breton and Charles de Gaulle?

>>18882733
>>18882838
René Guénon’s influence on the literary and intellectual life of his time has been recently documented in an impressive 1,200-page book by Xavier Accart, Guénon ou le renversement des clartés, which spans fifty years of French history and demonstrates the pervasive, if sometimes subterranean and implicit, impact of the works of the French metaphysician on personalities as diverse as André Gide, Simone Weil, Pierre Drieu la Rochelle, and Henri Bosco. Upon going through the pages of Accart’s impressive volume, one is literally astounded by the breadth, and sometimes the depth, of Guénon’s presence in the intellectual landscape of France between 1920 and 1970, a presence that a cursory, conventional consideration of the French intellectual history of the time would not betray. Who would suspect prima facie that Guénon’s works have been known and appreciated by personalities as diverse as André Breton and Charles de Gaulle?

>>18433898

>>18341518
>Guenon is a footno-

René Guénon’s influence on the literary and intellectual life of his time has been recently documented in an impressive 1,200-page book by Xavier Accart, Guénon ou le renversement des clartés, which spans fifty years of French history and demonstrates the pervasive, if sometimes subterranean and implicit, impact of the works of the French metaphysician on personalities as diverse as André Gide, Simone Weil, Pierre Drieu la Rochelle, and Henri Bosco. Upon going through the pages of Accart’s impressive volume, one is literally astounded by the breadth, and sometimes the depth, of Guénon’s presence in the intellectual landscape of France between 1920 and 1970, a presence that a cursory, conventional consideration of the French intellectual history of the time would not betray. Who would suspect prima facie that Guénon’s works have been known and appreciated by personalities as diverse as André Breton and Charles de Gaulle?

>Before passing on to consider time, however, it may be pointed out that the inexistence of an 'empty space' is enough to expose the absurdity of one of Kant's too famous cosmological antinomies: to ask 'whether the world is infinite or whether it is limited within space' is a question that has absolutely no meaning. Space cannot possibly extend beyond the world in order to contain it, because an empty space would then be in question, and emptiness cannot contain anything: on the contrary, it is space that is in the world, that is to say, in manifestation, and if consideration be confined to the domain of corporeal manifestation alone, it can be said that space is coextensive with this world, because it is one of its conditions; but this world is no more infinite than is space itself, for, like space, it does not contain every possibility, but only represents a certain particular order of possibilities, and it is limited by the determinations that constitute its very nature.

- ريني غينون

>>17474812
Yes its good, probably his best work, particularly for those not interested in Traditionalism

>>17426445
>Has Guenon written a single argument in his life?
Yes, he retroactively refuted Kant

>Before passing on to consider time, however, it may be pointed out that the inexistence of an 'empty space' is enough to expose the absurdity of one of Kant's too famous cosmological antinomies: to ask 'whether the world is infinite or whether it is limited within space' is a question that has absolutely no meaning. Space cannot possibly extend beyond the world in order to contain it, because an empty space would then be in question, and emptiness cannot contain anything: on the contrary, it is space that is in the world, that is to say, in manifestation, and if consideration be confined to the domain of corporeal manifestation alone, it can be said that space is coextensive with this world, because it is one of its conditions; but this world is no more infinite than is space itself, for, like space, it does not contain every possibility, but only represents a certain particular order of possibilities, and it is limited by the determinations that constitute its very nature.

- ريني غينون

>>17378748
>Nope. I'm still waiting on a refutation of the Antinomies.

>Before passing on to consider time, however, it may be pointed out that the inexistence of an 'empty space' is enough to expose the absurdity of one of Kant's too famous cosmological antinomies: to ask 'whether the world is infinite or whether it is limited within space' is a question that has absolutely no meaning. Space cannot possibly extend beyond the world in order to contain it, because an empty space would then be in question, and emptiness cannot contain anything: on the contrary, it is space that is in the world, that is to say, in manifestation, and if consideration be confined to the domain of corporeal manifestation alone, it can be said that space is coextensive with this world, because it is one of its conditions; but this world is no more infinite than is space itself, for, like space, it does not contain every possibility, but only represents a certain particular order of possibilities, and it is limited by the determinations that constitute its very nature.

- ريني غينون

>>16978132
Based

>>16924899

>Before passing on to consider time, however, it may be pointed out that the inexistence of an 'empty space' is enough to expose the absurdity of one of Kant's too famous cosmological antinomies: to ask 'whether the world is infinite or whether it is limited within space' is a question that has absolutely no meaning. Space cannot possibly extend beyond the world in order to contain it, because an empty space would then be in question, and emptiness cannot contain anything: on the contrary, it is space that is in the world, that is to say, in manifestation, and if consideration be confined to the domain of corporeal manifestation alone, it can be said that space is coextensive with this world, because it is one of its conditions; but this world is no more infinite than is space itself, for, like space, it does not contain every possibility, but only represents a certain particular order of possibilities, and it is limited by the determinations that constitute its very nature.

Traditionalists rise up!

>>16842717

>Before passing on to consider time, however, it may be pointed out that the inexistence of an 'empty space' is enough to expose the absurdity of one of Kant's too famous cosmological antinomies: to ask 'whether the world is infinite or whether it is limited within space' is a question that has absolutely no meaning. Space cannot possibly extend beyond the world in order to contain it, because an empty space would then be in question, and emptiness cannot contain anything: on the contrary, it is space that is in the world, that is to say, in manifestation, and if consideration be confined to the domain of corporeal manifestation alone, it can be said that space is coextensive with this world, because it is one of its conditions; but this world is no more infinite than is space itself, for, like space, it does not contain every possibility, but only represents a certain particular order of possibilities, and it is limited by the determinations that constitute its very nature.

- ريني غينون

>>16173622

>Before passing on to consider time, however, it may be pointed out that the inexistence of an 'empty space' is enough to expose the absurdity of one of Kant's too famous cosmological antinomies: to ask 'whether the world is infinite or whether it is limited within space' is a question that has absolutely no meaning. Space cannot possibly extend beyond the world in order to contain it, because an empty space would then be in question, and emptiness cannot contain anything: on the contrary, it is space that is in the world, that is to say, in manifestation, and if consideration be confined to the domain of corporeal manifestation alone, it can be said that space is coextensive with this world, because it is one of its conditions; but this world is no more infinite than is space itself, for, like space, it does not contain every possibility, but only represents a certain particular order of possibilities, and it is limited by the determinations that constitute its very nature.

>>15890005
>DIS ARGUMENT IZ VALID BECAUSE GUENON IS DA FINAL AUTHORITY NIGGA
This but unironically

>>15878607
> All you can do is accept and try to find salvation in another philosophy, such as Kant's Categorical Imperative.
Guenon never destroyed Christianity but he did destroy Kant

> Before passing on to consider time, however, it may be pointed out that the inexistence of an 'empty space' is enough to expose the absurdity of one of Kant's too famous cosmological antinomies: to ask 'whether the world is infinite or whether it is limited within space' is a question that has absolutely no meaning. Space cannot possibly extend beyond the world in order to contain it, because an empty space would then be in question, and emptiness cannot contain anything: on the contrary, it is space that is in the world, that is to say, in manifestation, and if consideration be confined to the domain of corporeal manifestation alone, it can be said that space is coextensive with this world, because it is one of its conditions; but this world is no more infinite than is space itself, for, like space, it does not contain every possibility, but only represents a certain particular order of possibilities, and it is limited by the determinations that constitute its very nature.