/lit/ - Literature

https://dailynous.com/2022/10/28/found-five-boxes-of-new-hegel/

>Of African mind, with the movement of African thought, the African God brought Africa into the light of the world. The light now itself afraid, so to speak, lost its purity once the African entered into its space of representation. The African cannot be represented as anything but an African, however, he cannot be represented as more African than he is: he shall be but African of the mind, and African of the Spirit, and African of Afro-body, the African's body appearing as shifting from black to red, and carrying the African heat inside, and the African History as well. The African heart of each African was forged in African fury, resulting in an African forged as an African in order to force life itself. Of African mind, the African dawn occurred violently, like African breath, a dawn as dark and devoid of representation as an African copulating with an another African to make the African even more African. A process not unlike mastication, of what the African did not represent, that is, of a thought unknown to any African but one that brought anew this African age, which is more precisely identified as an timeless African rancor into the world now always already African, that world that once represented to African, not can no longer represent due to Africans. Africans sit at the left hand of God, but sit there on account of Africans. God has now been allegedly negated by African thinkers, white Africans, as white as I in representation, but African underneath. An African that can be grasped by its maker, also an African. So from an African came an African to represent Africanity, from African to African. A suit of representation for an African, a seat at the German table for an African, even a salary for an African, and an African book of poetry to be read, afraid, while facing a crowd of Africans, crowding where the Africans crumble this representation now left to Africans. A single African of thought and mind resulting in the mind itself being a mind of Africans with Africueloquence and Africarrogance. And African children, hefty due to a break in representation separating the "a" from the Greek "phríkē", wherein the violence of the African comes to completion. A harsh sound to pronounce this "African", indeed, only an African tongue can represent it. With African delight, the world comes now full of industrial-Africans and Machiavellian-Africans, and Africans that are neither being nor beast, but only African. Of African mind and African thought, God brought Africa into the representation once without Africans.

Why does "apparent" object size change with distance?

1. The object supposedly has properties.
2. The eye supposedly has properties.
3. Neither increasing nor decreasing the distance between them can be said to alter their properties.
4. The distance between them cannot be said to have properties.

Therefore, distance should have no effect on "apparent" object size.

Men are the original trannies. The male creed is that:

1. One is necessarily born something other than a man.
2. One only transitions to manhood through a metamorphosis entailing hormonal, musculoskeletal, and purely aesthetic changes.
3. One's genitals are necessarily not male until undergoing a procedure (insertion into another body).
4. Even when fulfilling articles 1, 2, and 3, one is necessarily still absolutely not a man unless one also socioculturally passes as a man.
5. Even when fulfilling all previous articles, one's manhood is still absolutely in the balance, and will be absolutely lost unless all previous articles are constantly repeatedly fulfilled.

>>19847584
>>19847588

>>19617609

Quite the contrary, Hegel is right about everything: current children are not sanctified, they merely partake in the overall equalizing of household members, i.e. the father is no longer the monarch and the mother no longer the serf, one has to imagine a combination of all obscenities, livestock and jester and such, to unearth the abolished role of the child. Traditionally, children only grew into a false and perverse adulthood, analogous to the most debased sexual fantasies currently detailed by self-admitted sexual perverts, that lasted until they left the parental home. Globohomo should at least be commended for immanentizing the reality, as opposed to the fantasy, of tradition, not only the fantasy with which we retrospectively view tradition, but the actual fantasy in and of tradition itself. Traditional households are practically distinct species, the obsession with community is morbid precisely because households actually shared nothing, each of them is a properly Lovecraftian vista of utter incomprehension, an implicitly insane tyranny of the father. Current households are isolated because community is made redundant by the actual sharing of values. Unfortunately, for you, not for me, this is not Catholic natural revelation whereby tradition is delivered from itself and enters the next tier of being, but merely a confirmation that there is a nail driven in each hand. The global bonfire of the internet can now burn ALL faces.

Regarding Baudrillard's Gnosticism and his unimpeachably correct argument that Marxism and Capitalism are two sides of the same coin:

I maintain that both Marxism and Capitalism are nothing but Catholicism: it is not the Ontology of the Material, of plurality, that informs the Epistemology of Dispensation, it is the Epistemology of Dispensation that informs the Ontology of the Material. Without plurality there is no exchange, without exchange there is neither Marxism nor Capitalism, they are both animated by the fact that exchange, per the plurality of Materialism, is purportedly sanctioned by God himself, per the Catholic idea of Dispensation.

>Renounce all unknowing, that ye may be worthy of the mysteries of the Light and be saved from the servitors of Yaldabaōth and the fire-seas.

>>18661612
>Gnostics would have you believe bodily cancer is actually good

Just as Gnostics are the only ones who accept the Old Testament for what it is, without the veritably "postmodern" apology of vulgar Christianity, Gnostics are the only ones who take Catholics for their word in this regard. Whether it be the idea that everything is good or that good and evil are relative, the Catholic naturally double-dipping, the only conclusion is that, indeed, the evil described therein is the vital party of the emergent synergy, if not the truly good one. However, this is to expose the native CATHOLIC inversion of good and evil, not to affirm the Catholic evil as the Gnostic good, which is itself a rejection of the Catholic idea, whether implicit, per Catholicism, or explicit, per Gnosticism.

>>18631282
>>18631320
>>18632188
>mfw i am unimpeachably correct

>mfw no one realizes that the more one tries to renounce one's self the more active one's self is and the more "selfish" one necessarily is

>>18609710
>>18609975

Previously:

>>>/lit/thread/S18532270#p18532390
>peanut brain: Jesus invented compassion and charity as we know it.

>GALAXY BRAIN: JESUS INVENTED CONTEMPT AS WE KNOW IT. YALDABAOTH'S CHILDREN ARE AS THE ART OF HAPPY LIVESTOCK, DEPRIVED EVEN OF A "TRUE" CONSCIOUSNESS OF THEIR DEATHLY REALITY, IT IS THE BODY, THE CADAVER, THAT WAS ABSENT PRIOR TO THE CHRISTOLOGICAL ADVENT, NOT THE SPIRIT. THE PREHISTORIC BARBARISM WAS NOT A PROBLEM, IT WAS PRECISELY THE "PLENITUDE OF THE FATHER'S LOVE" WHEREBY ONE IS INDEFINITELY DESTROYED, AND HAPPILY SO, AS MANY CARTOON CHARACTERS ARE INDEFINITELY TORTURED AND KILLED BY THEIR CREATOR, THE "LOVE" BEING THE VERY OMISSION OF THIS REALITY: THE PHENOMENAL WORLD IS INDEED "GOD'S" GLORY IN THAT IT IS A SUPERFLUOUS ABSENCE OF "GOD'S" REALITY OF EATING HIS CREATION AND OF ITS OWN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. A HORIZONTAL PAGANISM, SO TO SPEAK, OF OBLIVIOUS CYCLES. IN THIS SENSE, HOW JESUS MANAGES TO DIE SHOULD BE THE FIRST MYSTERY, INCIDENTALLY, UNEARTHING THE TRUE MEANING OF THE (CATHOLIC) ANECDOTE THAT "GNOSTICS REJECT THE RESURRECTION". THE ATHEIST OBSESSION WITH RIDICULING THE "CORPSE ON THE CROSS" IS MOSTLY CORRECT. WITH NO CADAVER, "GOD" CAN INDEFINITELY GRACE HIS FAVORITE PEOPLE AS IF LICKING THE FINGERS OF THE HAND THAT GRIPPED THE VANQUISHED THAT HE ATE, UNBEKNOWN TO EITHER PARTY. WITH THE CADAVER, THE ART OF HAPPY LIVESTOCK COLLAPSES INTO SLAUGHTERHOUSES, THE VICTOR ONLY GIVES YALDABAOTH HIS DUE DEAD WEIGHT. CONSIDER THAT THE PEACE IN "MY PEACE I GIVE UNTO YOU: NOT AS THE WORLD GIVETH, GIVE I UNTO YOU" COULD BE THE PEACE OF DEATH: YALDABAOTH CAN NO LONGER SUBSIST ON ONE NOW THAT ONE IS TRULY ABSENT, DEAD, THAT DYING IS NOT A MEANS OF MIGRATION OR RETURN BUT IS ITSELF THE VERY "WHITE HOLE", IN STRICTLY METAPHORIC TERMS, NOW OPENING IN THE ABSENCE OF YALDABAOTH'S TERMINAL PARASITISM, THE "BLACK HOLE"

The "first" Monad is Evil, or rather, the Evil Monad can only conceive of itself as Temporally first, and in its onanism of emanating things ever more unwitting for itself to consume, so that it may relish them all the more, accidentally emanated, or rather, made room for the "last" Good Monad to bootstrap itself out of Time and into the Atemporal whence it annuls the Evil Monad.

>>18588005

Also, note the parallel between predestination and cosmology:

Between a "real" and "illusory" world, the former is the weak one, fundamentally knowable, changeable, and destructible though quantitative means, and the latter is the strong one, fundamentally unknowable, immutable, and indestructible through qualitative means. Contrary to vulgar criticism, Materialism is, in fact, the most fanciful world model, the attempted alleviation of the strong illusory world by fabricating the ridiculous idea of everything being "just particles bumping into each other" as a skeleton key to the world's "reality". Similarly, between "free will" and "predestination", the former is tyranny, nowhere is one's will more suppressed than in "freedom" pertaining to damnation, and the latter is liberty, nowhere is one's will more free than in being implicitly relieved even of its own freedom; even the "form" of will is an abomination per the former, you MUST will, and a true Christological advent per the latter, the freedom of will is paradoxically bilaterally preserved by predestination. It is hardy surprising that both Materialism and opposition to predestination are Catholic proclivities, to prevent the realization of the illusory world and to bind one's will with the terror of "freedom". Men are even uncannily described as "bumping into each other", thermodynamically exchanging "grace" and such.

>>18588005

Also, note the parallel between predestination and cosmology:

Between a "real" and "illusory" world, the former is the weak one, fundamentally knowable, changeable, and destructible though quantitative means, and the latter is the strong one, fundamentally unknowable, immutable, and indestructible through qualitative means. Contrary to vulgar criticism, Materialism is, in fact, the most fanciful world model, the attempted alleviation of the strong illusory world by fabricating the ridiculous idea of everything being "just particles bumping into each other" as a skeleton key to the world's "reality". Similarly, between "free will" and "predestination", the former is tyranny, nowhere is one's will more suppressed than in "freedom" pertaining to damnation, and the latter is the liberty, nowhere is one's will more free than in being implicitly relieved even of its own freedom; even the "form" of will is an abomination per the former, you MUST will, and a true Christological advent per the latter, the freedom of will is paradoxically bilaterally preserved by predestination.

>>18560894
>constantly complains about rationalists being "cowards" who are scared of the "real world"
>reads hegel
>goes insane
>dies

>>18498410

Also, all of the alleged good provided by rights is not only not imposed but even MORE imposed than the negative value thereof: it is not that a car satisfies one's implicit desire to drive at the cost of being a bottomless money and work pit, but that after having a bottomless money and work pit perfidiously imposed onto one's self as what one allegedly desires, one then further imposes the desire to drive onto one's self to alleviate the initial imposition, which in turn makes it even worse.

>>18346334
>>18346585
>mfw i am unimpeachably correct

>>16923548
>>16923816

>>16918526

Considering sex in media as just another kind of content is not "mature" or "libertine", quite the contrary, it has the same etiology as considering it "taboo" in real life merely for the lack of its Phenomenal instantiations, and now considers it not "taboo" merely for the abundance thereof; terminally primitive surrender.

>he thinks of trinity in the numerical sense

Hopeless.

>>16338583
>still no answer

>The paradox is thus that there is no Self that precedes Spirit’s “self-alienation”: the very process of alienation creates/generates the “Self” from which Spirit is alienated and to which it then returns. (Hegel here turns around the standard notion that a failed version of X presupposes this X as its norm (measure): X is created, its space is outlined, only through repetitive failures to reach it.) Spirit’s self-alienation is the same as, fully coincides with, its alienation from its Other (nature), because it constitutes itself through its “return to itself” from its immersion in natural Otherness. In other words, Spirit’s return to itself creates the very dimension to which it returns. (This holds for all “returns to origins”: when, from 19th century onwards, new nation-states were constituting themselves in Central and Eastern Europe, their discovery and return to “old ethnic roots” generated these roots.)

>What this means is that the “negation of the negation,” the ”return to oneself” from alienation, does not occur where it seems to. In the “negation of the negation,” Spirit’s negativity is not relativized, subsumed under an encompassing positivity; it is, on the contrary, the “simple negation” which remains attached to the presupposed positivity it negated, the presupposed Otherness from which it alienates itself. It follows that the “negation of the negation” is nothing but the negation of the substantial character of this Otherness itself, the full acceptance of the abyss of Spirit’s self-relating, which retroactively posits all its presuppositions. In other words, once we are in negativity, we never quit it and regain the lost innocence of origins. It is only in “negation of the negation” that the origins are truly lost, that their very loss is lost, that they are deprived of the substantial status of that which was lost.

>Spirit heals its wound not by directly healing it, but by getting rid of the very full and sane body into which the wound was cut. It is in this precise sense that, according to Hegel, “the wounds of the Spirit heal, and leave no scars behind.”[1] Hegel’s point is not that Spirit heals its wounds so perfectly that, in a magic gesture of retroactive sublation, even their scars disappear. The point is rather that, in the course of dialectical process, a shift of perspective occurs which makes the wound itself appear as its opposite – the wound itself is its own healing when perceived from another standpoint.

>>14896778

Free will is so free that one plans his whole life AS one is distinguishing one's self from God, including one's degree of forgetfulness of this fact and of impression that it is not so. Anything and everything in one's life truly being the only thing that could have happened, Ontologically. One IS the coincidence between freedom and determination.

>>14896778

Free will is so free that one plans his whole life AS he is distinguishing one's self from God, including one's degree of forgetfulness of this fact and of impression that it is not so. Anything and everything in one's life truly being the only thing that could have happened, Ontologically. One IS the coincidence between freedom and determination.

>>14861945

To the contradiction.

>>14662025

>Life swings like a pendulum backward and forward between Hegel and Hegel.