/lit/ - Literature

>>16381638
I've been meaning to post something about this.

>One of the subjects that appear in the interspace is characterology, a field of indefinite scope that can be defined narrowly and broadly. The essence and expression of man: that is a world.

>The contemplation of the characters leads us into the proximity of astrology. Character interpretation or, better, character formation are the main tasks of the horoscope. In our days, characterology is considered a science, although it only becomes fertile through elements that are beyond knowledge and bring it closer to the arts. Character interpretation presupposes a kind of musicality. There must be a fluidity between the critic and the person being judged, including congeniality. This limits the scope of applied psychology, which can be regarded as one of the sub-disciplines of characterology. The assessment reflects the assessor. The character of the boss can be read from the appraisal of his subordinates.

With the question of characterology, rather than physiognomy, we get to the heart of perception, the extent of what one sees when he begins to judge another man. This is the conflict of spirit and the instincts, of strength over the will and the great battle of fate. Whether one sees only the base instincts or the entire figure of man is also how the judge of character sees himself being judge, equal to his subject as they both stand before greater laws. Military decisions make such a distinction clear.

With Nietzsche we already see a weakening, a will which cannot see its own Christian character, as the base instincts take over. This was the very conflict with fate that Machiavelli spoke of, the relation to the Chiron figure which must be aware of the dangers. Nietzsche's Dionysus is really a dead Chiron, one without salvation, trampled by the centaurs. This is where we see him as blind before character, his inability to see any of the true qualities of Socrates, the Stoics, Wagner, the Greek Tyrants.

With nihilist conservatism we see an ever further weakening, even an embrace of all the character elements of the enemy. This is, of course, necessary for modern law to function, each man is paired, conjoined to his other, a centaur figure. It matters very little which part is left- or right-wing, these are even questions of digression as from such a perspective one may only see half of the character of the other, what is necessary to himself and the process of conjoined movement which must reconcile perfectly in its violence.

Nietzsche's method, and the whole of the modern conception with it, is entirely opposed to Xenophon's idea of the Great King as Chiron - the ignoble returned to primordial power. Machiavelli leaves us with a portal at least, while Nietzsche condemns the myth to biological pantheism. Thieving a noble symbol of the master and slave he descends into the bestial but destroys it, leaving nothing but a torso tearing at the ground, crawling away from its lesser half.