/lit/ - Literature

> "Killing people is wrong!"

For killing people to be wrong, there has to be the property of wrongness - concrete or abstract. Yet the property of wrongness is not apparent to the empirical senses. Moralists will argue that killing is wrong, because our feelings say so - yet that it to suggest that feelings relate to the property of wrongness anyhows. They might even resort to a tu-quoque, "would you like to be killed?", as if the Form of Wrongness participates in the Will to not be Killed. Yet that would raise the question, how would Will determine Wrongness? Ex-nihilo?

>>20639737
At what point do you just suspend the noumena-phenomena distinction altogether and reify shit?

For example, we talk of the "thing" to signify the naive realist sense of 'duh, there's an object in front of me', but then we go to Kant and say "thing-in-itself". However, even the thing-in-itself is not immediately known, but is viewed through the lens of our own perception and prejudiced reasoning and so we have a thing-in-itself-in-itself, a thing-in-itself-in-itself-in-itself, a thing-itself-in-itself-in-itself-in-itself, a thing-in-itself-in-itself-in-itself-in-itself-in-itself ad infinitum.

Personally, I reify shit for destructive nihilist purposes only. I do not care for mainstream language. I do not care for mainstream culture.

And so whatever the mainstream says, I smash it with the nominalist hammer. Whatever destroys it, I reify. It is irrelevant if what I reify is factually false, what matters is that I use what concepts I reify as destructively as possible - an active apophatic ontology. Reality used to be defined by what it is not, now reality should be defined by its notTING - active linguistic wrecking and sabotage.

>>20549898
>People usually feel really bad in situations like those.
Usually? What's so unusual about Stoiccuck and Christcuck slave morality contriving an imagined future revenge? Why would the mere word "bad" correspond to the real feeling of "badness", beyond description by words? What's so fundamentally sick about such cuck worldviews masochistically degrading people? Doesn't "badness" assume some sort of realism beyond nominalism?

I'm literally obsessed with this faggot's philosophy. He debunked everyone else, how could you believe in christianity, gnosticism, paganism or whatever when you read him ? "Might is right" is the only true thing in this world