/lit/ - Literature

>>17044350
Mill is a good choice, but not as bad as pic related.

>>17044373
>shreds the last few remaining traditional institutions to pieces
>lauded by conservatives
how did he do it?

Obligatory. probably the most vile, disgusting anglo """"philosopher""""

>>17044350
Why not every Anglo? They steal my ideas then act like they get them from their dumb solipsistic head

>>17044350

like father like son I guess. the Mills were a particularly repugnant breed of bugmen

>>17044350
>>17044373
>>17044411
good choices, pretty much any political economist deserves to be on this list especially pic related
>invents globalism
>accidentally spawns Marxism
>provides justification for imperialism
also guess what you can find in the Early life section of his Wikipedia article

>>17044350
At least he started with and completed the Greeks in the original greek, unlike you.

>>17044350
Darwin. Someone like Buffon is actually pleasing to read but fuck Darwin.

>>17044373
>Jew
>Anglo
??

>>17044457
>At least he started with and completed the Greeks in the original greek, unlike you.
so did Nietzsche and he BTFO'ed this A*glo subhuman
>253. There are truths which are best recognized by mediocre minds, because they are best adapted for them, there are truths which only possess charms and seductive power for mediocre spirits: — one is pushed to this probably unpleasant conclusion, now that the influence of respectable but mediocre Englishmen — I may mention Darwin, John Stuart Mill, and Herbert Spencer — begins to gain the ascendancy in the middle-class region of European taste. Indeed, who could doubt that it is a useful thing for SUCH minds to have the ascendancy for a time?

>Gluttony is regarded by the Catholic Church as one of the seven deadly sins, and those who practise it are placed by Dante in one of the deeper circles of hell; but it is a somewhat vague sin, since it is hard to say where a legitimate interest in food ceases and guilt begins to be incurred. Is it wicked to eat anything that is not nourishing? If so, with every salted almond we risk damnation.

The combination of peabrained autism and smugness of this pseud is unbearable

>>17044532
this is the ultimate anglo

>>17044486

no difference t b h

>>17044350
Dryden for sure.

Oh hey guys

Seems like more recently women have stepped in because the anglo bugmen have moved to econometry, statistics, theoretical physics etc where they can play out their positivist fantasies.

Anglohags like Atwood or Mantel are insufferable

Good thread
In line with Spencer, I would offer up a particularly soulless man by the name of Francis Galton, who is in many respects responsible for the practice of eugenics, an idea which came to fester, fashionably, across all of the American universities and was promulgated by all of the good little Anglo lib progressive professors until thousands and thousands of people were sterilized and killed

>>17044639
nice one
posting Spencer since it wasn't done

>>17044639
Also, he was the half cousin of Darwin, incidentally

Me desu.

>>17044350
Mill was definitely a proto-bugman but he was actually aware of the ongoing bugmanization of Britain in his day, and thought it was a problem. I think it's in On Liberty where he talks about how people are becoming homogenized and individual thought, subcultures, traditions, etc. were dying out.

whatever his intentions may have been with brave new world, he was a soulless, reductionist, materialist liberal like the rest of them.

Darwin and Huxley family were only good for producing depressed scientists. should have been stuck in a lab to labor for those who can enjoy life, leisure and society

honorary anglo
I still wonder how such a devious man could be born near the Mediterranean Sea

>>17044532
interestingly Mill was Bertie's godfather, a*gloism is a contagious disease

have a fellow from across the atlantic. has the most stereotypical angloid look.
Behaviorism is possibly the most sterile, soulless and depressing theory/ideology possible.

No wonder it was heavily promoted by the Ford foundation lel.

>>17044726
Comte was French.

>>17044726

guy was an enigma t b h. while building greek temples and worshipping science, he adored the catholic church

>>17044752
not the guy you're responding to but that was precisely this anon's point hence why he was only an honorary A*glo, he and Mill were actually penpals and the eternal bugman gave him high praise in his book "Auguste Comte and Positivism" although he took issue with the religious veneer of Comtean brand of positivism

>>17044734
Good one - and his stink still wavers prominently in the culture whenever anyone says shit like “men are TAUGHT to do A, B and C, they’re TAUGHT to never show their emotions, etc.” or any variety of arguments about how human behavior is simply “learned” through “culture.” Skinner and the ford foundation did a number, that’s for sure

>>17044532
Also gluttony isn't even in one of the deeper circles of Hell in Dante, it's like in the third one, so you can add ignorance on top of that. pretty characteristic of Russell t.bh.

>>17044639
>>17044666
I almost threw up when I read about these two.

Also relevant quote from Goethe:
>“While the Germans are tormenting themselves with the solution of philosophical problems, the English, with their great practical understanding, laugh at us, and win the world. Everybody knows their declamations against the slave-trade; and while they have palmed upon us all sorts of humane maxims as the real foundation of their proceedings, it is at last discovered that their true motive is a practical object, which the English always notoriously require in order to act, and which should have been known before. In their extensive domains on the western coast of Africa they themselves use the blacks, and it is against their interest for them to be carried off. They have founded large colonies of negroes in America, which are very productive, and yearly return a large profit in blacks. From these they can supply the demand in North America, and since they thus carry on a highly profitable trade, an importation from without would be against their commercial interests; so they preach with a practical view against the inhuman African slave-trade. Even at the Congress of Vienna, the English envoy denounced it with great zeal, but the Portuguese envoy had the good sense to reply quietly, that he did not know they had come together to sit in judgment on the world, or to decide upon principles of morality. He well knew the object of England; and he had also his own, which he knew how to plead for and obtain.”

>tfw you get put in the lethal chamber by a Fabian death squad because you didn't do enough overtime in the aryan blood factory

>>17044824
>>17044726
meant to (You) this one

>>17044350
I suppose Rand deserves a mention despite being Russian Jewish at birth.

>>17044833
seriously what the fuck is this obsession early socialists and progressives had with race and eugenics? any books about leftism and eugenics?

>>17044639
lel people still seething at Galton centuries later. statistics are not always fake

>>17044833
Did he really say that? I thought Shaw was based, pretty sad.

Seriously though, when and why did it go wrong? Was it power and isolation?

>>17044666
>The last decades of Spencer's life were characterised by growing disillusionment and loneliness. He never married, and after 1855 was a perpetual hypochondriac[16] who complained endlessly of pains and maladies that no physician could diagnose at that time.[17][citation needed] By the 1890s his readership had begun to desert him while many of his closest friends died and he had come to doubt the confident faith in progress that he had made the center-piece of his philosophical system. His later years were also ones in which his political views became increasingly conservative. Whereas Social Statics had been the work of a radical democrat who believed in votes for women (and even for children) and in the nationalisation of the land to break the power of the aristocracy, by the 1880s he had become a staunch opponent of female suffrage and made common cause with the landowners of the Liberty and Property Defence League against what they saw as the drift towards 'socialism' of elements (such as Sir William Harcourt) within the administration of William Ewart Gladstone – largely against the opinions of Gladstone himself. Spencer's political views from this period were expressed in what has become his most famous work, The Man Versus the State.
LMAO Spencer was the primordial male feminist aka incel in hiding trying to score enough progressive points to get access to poon

>>17044847
>I suppose Rand deserves a mention despite being Russian Jewish at birth.
This. She made businessmen all around the world think of themselves as champions and heroes of the humanity.

>>17044819
Russell wallowed in his ignorance like a pig in the mud. a very shallow thinker

His "marriage and morals" is also repugnant. it is incomprehensible how anyone can have so little honor, shame, pride, instinct, self-preservation.

>>17044888
>LMAO Spencer was the primordial male feminist aka incel in hiding trying to score enough progressive points to get access to poon
kek, well put

>>17044877
I hope you’re not saying Chaucer was one of them

>>17044532
>>17044734
why do some anglos have weird bird-like faces?

>>17044877
It's not all bad. But generally, England has gone from Mary's Dowry, a sceptered isle of merriment, to perfidious albion of satanic mills.

Mcluhan is an example of a recent, soulful and intelligent anglo. I highly reccommend to read up on his person and his cryptic "reactionary" thinking.

>Everything that is especially hateful and devilish and inhuman about the conditions and strains of modern industrial society is not only Protestant in origin, but it is their boast (!) to have originated it”

Chesterton as well. a bit simplistic, but enjoyable and comfy.

Then there is Macintyre, Carlyle, Froude, Fitzhugh, Ruskin, Morris, Pugin,...

>>17044949
>why do some anglos have weird bird-like faces?
it's a dysgenic fenotype that has been labeled "a birdcel" in blackpill/incel circles, other symptoms include atheism, materialism and zealous feminist activism in hope of attracting a female mate

>>17044935
I'm saying precisely the contrary
>>17044965
I agree that every anglo is obviously not a bugman, but the correlation is strong. I'll check these names thanks

>>17044903

>son of a cuckold
>himelf a cuckold
>invents a moral system that justifies cuckoldry

truly a genius.

>>17044860
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-Ljkoh_vmE&ab_channel=iconic

never trust an anglo. H G Wells also was very disturbing in his futuristic fantasies.

>>17044852

Fabian society contained a lot of nutters. stood at the edge of soulless angloids on the one hand, and nihilistic bloomsbury poofters on the other.

>>17044965
Protestantism was bad but 1657 was worse. Shakespeare was during Prot times

>>17044350
interesting thread
I'm a continental European (Polish to be precise) and I'm interested in the causes of the bugman shift in English. Reactionary tradcaths are going to blame Protestantism but England had a great culture even after Protestantism - people like Shakespeare, Milton and even the KJV is a masterpiece. It seems that most people in this thread were active during and after the 19th century, is that when the shift happened? If so what was the cause?

>>17045005
in agreement with you there. RIP Laud.

>>17044970

>>17045005
>1657
what's that? Cromwell? Not too familiar with anglo history, why do you think he caused such a shift?

*single-handedly redeems the Anglo race and culture*

>>17045017
Effects of industrialization?

>>17045017
Milton was brilliant, but a bugman too.

>justifies regicide, destruction of old traditions
>supports no fault divorce
>first wife abandons him within a month of their marriage
>frail, effeminate, sickly
>loves jews
>paradise lost is a diatribe against tyranny, making satan come very close to the hero


but i fully agree with you. i think it is a strain , of the nonconformist upper-middle class, who lost their faith.

would add that Shakespeare, if not cryptocatholic, hailed from a catholic recusant family. John Donne too was a catholic until begged and forced to become an anglican priest by king James.

>>17045000
>that video
Unless that's a very avant-garde comedy skit the level of autistry is terrifying. I think I even prefer Nazis' obsession with ethnically vacuum-cleaning Europe to this unspeakable self-content idiocy.

>>17044350
really surprised no one posted him yet, the A*glo and Frog nations have this weird resonnance where ideas that originate in England travel to the other side of the channel, find fertile ground and become more radical and then come back to England with amplified strength. A*glo empiricism and Nick Land are cases in point

>>17045044
cryptojews allowed to practice their belief in England and allowed to enter England.

but in general, the ascendancy of puritanism is probably the root cause. 17th century england was in religion as repulsive and weird as americans. circumsizing nutters like Traske, the muggletonians, naked quakers, the levellers, zealot presbyterians,...

this with the dominance of the moneyed class and the succes of materialist worldview (royal society, hobbes,...) transformed via locke and the glorious revolution, blackstone, macaulay, priestley, the nonconformist victorianism and subsequent reaction to it by the loss of faith.

>>17045094

what's wrong with empiricism? Aristotle invented it and he is to me stil the pinnacle of philosophy and sociology.

for me it is just some form of chesteron's fence that makes you not fall for utopians, sociopathic strivers, but stick to the tested ways, to the moderate mean, not be misled by grand a priori theories etc.

>why yes i am an entry-level pseud, how could you tell

but seriously, the connection between lad and empiricsm, or the hate of empiricism I don't get.

>>17045056
>If I had
my way, I would build a lethal chamber as big as the Crystal Palace,
with a military band playing softly, and a Cinematograph working
brightly, and then I’d go out in back streets and main streets and bring
them all in, all the sick . . . the maimed; I would lead them gently, and
they would smile me a weary thanks

His sexual writings are pretty good though

>>17044350
Ruskin whenever he doesn’t write about art or architecture is insufferable and really shows his Anglo. He did partially redeem himself with his final memoirs though because they are far more poetic than ideological, which should be a lesson for Anglo writers as their poets like Byron and Keats are the embodiment of soul compared to Mills and Russel. Good thread

>>17045127
>His sexual writings are pretty good though
Quick rundown

>>17045142
Lady chatterly’s lover is a whole novel of it

>>17044639
>until thousands and thousands of people were sterilized and killed
implying this is a bad thing? look where we are now.

>>17044350
>>17044350
>Hegel stands above, Marx below the level of historical actuality. Take away Hegel’s
metaphysics and you will discover a political thinker with a sense of reality unequaled in
modern philosophy. As a "Prussian" by intellectual choice he placed the state at the
center of his extraordinarily profound, well-nigh Goethean vision of historical development, whereas Marx, the Englishman by choice, assigned to the economic life the central role in his Darwinian and mechanistic theory of historical "evolution" (he would call it "progress"). [...] Marx, on the other hand, conceived of history without the state as an arena for jousting parties, as a conflict of private economic interests. The materialist concept is the English concept of history; it reflects the countenance of that independent nation of Vikings and businessmen.

>>17045099
>glorious revolution
this was like cromwell another dutch jew baked coup, it did the real damage

OK anons, um I'm somewhat new to this but what exactly is it you have about the writers and philosophers of my Island?
a few lines of summary if you will.

>>17044486
Yes. Good, you're beginning to learn and unravel.

>>17044373
wasn't he a germoid jew?

>>17045172
The criteria for sterilization was decided by progressive college professors, “experts,” intellectual elites, liberals/leftists, feminists, etc. I don’t want those people deciding who gets sterilized, or anyone for that matter. But in any case, I don’t think the utility of erasing people from the gene pool warrants the moral crime.

I think the problems we have now are being wrought by the universities, the media, the education system, ngo’s, institutions etc and I don’t think sterilizing black people (which I assume is your chosen prescription) or low iq’s would solve anything anyways. They aren’t the problem

>>17045099
I've been reading a bit about the situation there and it appears that our friend Charles was himself beholden to the money interest before Cromwell ever got his windmilljew funding. Reading it as a victory of usury is maybe a bit reductive. And while some miscreant bagelfriends did come over most Jews in England had and have nothing to do with it.

>>17045302
>progressive college professors
ah, yeah that's a bad idea.

>>17045302
>(which I assume is your chosen prescription)
You would be quite wrong in that assumption.
it should apply to everyone.

>>17045311
yes I've always felt it an over simplification. if anythin Cromwell went back on the jews, it went really bad after the sabbataeans infiltrated and subverted the freemasons

>>17044350
Do you think reading A*glo philosophy is good as a therapeutic endeavor, bros? Nietzsche detested A*glos and is almost their polar opposite (the only contact points I can think of is his atheism) but he seemed well read in A*glo "thought" and was outspoken on their philosophical poverty.

>>17045385
of course. know thy enemy

>>17045302
this exactly. sterilizing some working class laborer who drinks and acts out his frustration on his wife because he can't cope with 12h work industrial shifts is not eugenic, whatever bugmen may think.

you had sufragettes advocating mass sterilization of every wifebeater, drunkard, petty thief, absolutely mental.

>>17045311
agreed. puritan philosemitism and protozionism was however udoubtedly a fact, with parallels to 19th century anglozionism and todays american christian zionism.
https://www.academia.edu/30909670/Christian_Jews_in_Early_Modern_England_The_Case_of_the_Tillamites

https://www.academia.edu/39356453/John_Traske_Puritan_Judaizing_and_the_Ethic_of_Singularity

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057%2F9780230599932_3

https://www.jstor.org/stable/42973955?seq=1

but that is outside the scope of this thread. I fully agree that "muh usury" is a dumb simplification.

Here is a modern manifestation of the species. Not really /lit/ though

Not /lit/ but still anglobashing

>>17045448
Fuck me, I'm an idiot.

>>17045458
Kek really hope this isn't photoshoped

>muh specieism
>postnatal abortion

>>17045473
Almost forgot about him, a worthy heir to bugmanship

>tfw your country's only philosophical contribution is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_realism

life is suffering

>>17045413
Thanks for the recs. Btw do you have any recs about Cromwell and also the Glorious Revolution in general and the preceding and following periods?

>>17045463
Probably is but it still sums him and the eternal a*glo up perfectly.

>>17044949
keltic nordid type

Also of note in the context of A*glo bashing - neural damage done by f.e. excessive consumption of porn is followed by an increase in utilitarian moral judgments
>Here we show that six patients
with focal bilateral damage to the ventromedial prefrontal cortex
(VMPC), a brain region necessary for the normal generation of
emotions and, in particular, social emotions12–14, produce an abnor�mally ‘utilitarian’ pattern of judgements on moral dilemmas that
pit compelling considerations of aggregate welfare against highly
emotionally aversive behaviours (for example, having to sacrifice
one person’s life to save a number of other lives)7,8. In contrast, the
VMPC patients’ judgements were normal in other classes of moral
dilemmas. These findings indicate that, for a selective set of moral
dilemmas, the VMPC is critical for normal judgements of right and
wrong. The findings support a necessary role for emotion in the
generation of those judgements.

>>17045500
> whose central claim, as stated by leading theorist John Anderson, was that "whatever exists … is real, that is to say it is a spatial and temporal situation or occurrence that is on the same level of reality as anything else that exists".

>>17045500
I thought about moving to Australia but I'm an arachnophobe, are spiders and other arachnids really that big of a problem in your country?

>>17044852
Yes, War Against the Weak by Edwin Black. I’d highly recommend it. Black doesn’t explicitly say this in the book, but these people were so fond of eugenics because progressives have always been the intellectual elite - they are the smartest, the most educated, the wealthiest, the most aristocratic, etc. they are the ruling class, and their ascendancy became most prominent in the early twentieth century which happened to dovetail with the burgeoning genetics research. The progressive ruling class despises the commoners, and their hatred manifests in many ways - in the early twentieth century (and even much later), their chosen method happened to be eugenics.

>>17045560
People give Australia a bad rep for being a country full of dangerous animals out to kill you but it's actually pretty safe here. Spiders don't bite unless you fight them, so leave spiders alone when you see them. We even eat insects in your home

Surprised nobody has posted this fatass, empiricism is a plague and reducing conciousness to mere impressions screams soullessness.
>>17044532
>I would never die for my beliefs
Isn't that a belief in itself? That's just replacing a belief you aren't sure about for another you're also unsure about. Always thought that quote was fucking dumb.

>>17045590
Hume literally cannot be refuted

>>17045590
>I would die for my beliefs not because they're correct but because they're mine

>>17045572
Kinda reminding of this American campaign to sterilize drug abusers. Guess old habits die hard.

>>17045503

not really t bh. I just plunder Academia.edu and Jstor and just roam from article to article, reference to reference.

I read a basic book to get a good overview of the period, and then dive into the rabbithole

no book is going to equal a 30page article on the philosemitic leanings of John Selden, or a 25 page article on Francis Bacon's theory of imperialism. no book , how detailed it may be, will describe Harrington's scheme for settling jews in ireland in the hope of the endtimes or the precedents for the shipmoney case or Philip Sidney's neoplatonist themes

>>17045590
Would agree with you, but>>17045634 is sadly right. his scepticism is brutal. Macintyre has spent his entire life to surpass it, but still has failed to do so.

Meet the man who started it all.

>>17045634
>>17045707
These guys are correct. Also Hume himself was a pretty based guy, he was more or less an oldschool Tory despite his irreligious worldview and many researchers have argued that his insistence on tradition was a logical conclusion of his scepticism. Ironically I think that it is people who tried to overcome it like Kant deserve a worse reputation than Hume

Best thread on /lit/ right now, surprisingly educated posters

thoughts on this guy? Bugman no doubt, but does he not have a point somewhere?

>>17045750
Frank Little Belly???

>>17045893
Nope, since the main point of his theory has been historically proven wrong over and over again. Total Bugman.

>>17044902
Which they are. They are the scientist's practical enabler and implementaion.

>>17046018
>Which they are. They are the scientist's practical enabler and implementaion.
So, thanks for the Mcdonalds and the Fordist model of production, I suppose.

>>17045194

good post. Spengler never dissapoints

> Posting Bacon
> Posting Malthus
> Posting Darwin
> Posting Galton
> Posting Russell
Holy Shit, I seem to have found myself in a midwit cope thread.
All you faggots must bow to the glorious Anglo-Saxon scientific tradition!

>>17045582
>We even eat insects in your home
>We

>>17046094

>Holy Shit, I seem to have found myself in a midwit cope thread.
>All you faggots must bow to the glorious Anglo-Saxon scientific tradition!

>>17046094
You're posting on a midwit cope board

>>17046125
>You're posting on a midwit cope board

>>17046125
True kek.
>>17046119
Cringe.

>>17046094
The others are legit (whatever one may think of them) but Russell doesn't really belong in the scientific tradition, he was just a LARPing philotist pretending to be a scientist. Aristotles, whom he criticized, was unironically more of a scientist than Russell.

>>17044350
>>17044434
I don't know what Carlyle ever saw in him.

>>17046094
nice science you got there, sir Isaac. you don't fit to this thread because you were an actual noble Englishman with a soul

>>17046191
I have never seen that variation with 7 circles, what is its significance?

>>17045590
Hume is absolutely based and his moral philosophy utterly demolishes the bugman utilitarianism

>>17046263
>Hume is absolutely based and his moral philosophy utterly demolishes the bugman utilitarianism
could you elaborate?

>>17046283
Hume basically argues that moral language expresses moral sentiments, like a kind of emotivism. The right and wrong of an action is contained entirely in your perception of the action, and certain such perceptions are "natural" while others are not. But there are no objective (that is, subject-independent) moral truths.

>>17046173
Formalizing Mathematics by giving it a logical foundation doesn't let him join the ranks of "real" scientist?

>>17046125
This

Thank God for anglos and neolibs. No matter my personal failings I can always remind myself that I'm not an anglo or neolib.

>>17045657
>>17045572
>>17045302
>>17044639

just lol at muh eugenics. Let's take the illustrious bloodline of the Earls of Russell;

First we have 1st lord russell. painfully depressing marriage, and his political career consists of destroying the aristocratic class to which he himself belonged. but ok, somewhat normal.

Next we have lord russell 2, a depressed cuckold whose Bull is the tutor of his son(3d earl).

Then we have the 3d earl russell (Bertie), also a cuckold, who separated from his wife because despite his professed sexual progressiveness he couldn't stomach his wife giving birth to two(!) bastards.
Next we have his son (fourth generation) who was diagnosed as a schizophrenic;
>the only person in the United Kingdom to be denied the vote on two counts, first, for being a peer and, second, for being insane. He made a speech in the House of Lords that was considered so outlandish that to this day it is the only speech unrecorded by Hansard

This schizo then had three daughters;
>Neither Sarah nor Lucy married or bore children; Felicity had one daughter, Rowan. >Like their father and mother, the three daughters suffered from serious mental health challenges.

>Lucy, who was Bertrand Russell's favourite grandchild, died from self-immolation, at the age of 26, in the forecourt of a church near Penzance, ostensibly protesting in the cause of world peace.[4]

these are the sort of people believing they should judge who should be sterilized or euthanised. just lol.

>>17046332
Meh, that book became outdated the second it left the printing press. It certainly does not formalize mathematics in their entirety, it is neither particularly successful nor particularly clear with the parts it does try to formalize, and Whitehead wrote the bulk of it anyway. Not to mention mathematical logic isn't precisely an empirical science (as sciences are in the Anglo tradition).

>>17046633
Had to admit I didn't expect this. Russell might have been a hack but he never struck me as harboring the seed of insanity.

The school of resentment has arrived

>>17045473
Singer is jewish, albeit he's exemplar of the modern anglo mind as well as the humanist jew one.

>>17046633
People themselves are the greatest capital in the world, and you can judge an individual greatly on how they've changed other people.

>>17045590
Hume is based and even refutes Kant if you think about it.

>>17045000
Watching that video reminds me why people like George Bernard Shaw should be killed. They're an existential threat to humanity. They've vacated their own lives' worth by making the very concept of valuable living absurd. In both practice and moral, they should be killed.

>New Atheism
>Selfish Gene

just a new chapter in the life of anglo-bugmannism

Why all the counter signalling of eugenics in this thread? Afraid you wouldn't make it? That it was advocated by leftist retards with awful criterions doesn't mean it couldn't be defended with the right ones.
I guess if you faith defends you from indulging in it, that's ok. But as things stand, some level of eugenics will be necessary to even keep G from falling ; we're already becoming retarded. Read nerds like Woodley and his Modernity and Cultural Decline.

>>17046954
#woke

>>17046733
He was a genius and many geniuses have insane sons
> Russell
> Einstein
> Nash
In any case, his philosophical son was Wittgenstein and he seemed pretty sane.

>>17046971
It's modernist totalitarianism. You just want to set up your society so that the structures themselves promote eugenics.

Russell is just an all round slimy immoral reptile.

>>17044350
Borges had a raging boner for England. I don't know exactly what authors he liked tough.

>>17044350
This soulless An*glo bugman with his Whig history.

>>17046971

what do you propose then? afaik the only thing that can done with some level of acceptable certainty and purpose is fetus screening for down syndrome, spina bifida etc and acting accordingly.

>>17047018

Very good choice anon. Thank God for Butterfield exposing this fraud

>>17047012
He was a big fan of Shakespeare, Kipling, Browne, Stevenson, and Chesterton. I don't know if you have noticed a certain pattern there but all of them are clearly not bugmen.

>>17046961

don't forget this nobhead

>>17044833
What's up with socialists and five-year plans

>>17047012
Emerson? Many of Borges’s other enthusiasms are equally dismaying, like the Russians’ for Jack London, or the symbolist poets’ for Poe; on the whole they tend to be directed toward obscure or marginal figures, to stand for somewhat cranky, wayward, even decadent choices: works at once immature or exotic, thin though mannered, clever rather than profound, neat instead of daring, too often the products of learning, fancy, and contrivance to make us comfortable; they exhibit a taste that is still in its teens, one becalmed in backwater, and a mind that is seriously intrigued by certain dubious or jejune forms, forms which have to be overcome, not simply exploited: fantastic tales and wild romances, science fiction, detective stories, and other similar modes which, with a terrible theological energy and zeal, impose upon implausible premises a rigorous gamelike reasoning.

Thus for this minutely careful essayist and poet it’s not Aristotle, but Zeno, it’s not Kant, but Schopenhauer; it’s not even Hobbes, but Berkley, not Mill or Bradley, but—may philosophy forgive him—Spencer; it’s Dunne, Beckford, Bloy, the Cabalists; it’s Stevenson, Chesterton, Kipling, Wells and William Morris, Browne and De Quincey Borges turns and returns to, while admitting no such similar debt to James, Melville, Joyce, and so on.

>>17047018

*blocks your path

>>17046720
Russell's colleagues and mental peers were Gödel, Frege, Whitehead, Hardy, Wittgenstein, Peano, Neumann, Ayer, Moore, Quine, Popper, etc.
Questioning his activism, views, moral philosophy, and general degeneracy is ok but questioning his logico mathematical contributions and his contributions to the philosophy of science is simply mid-wit cope.

>>17044852
honestly, read gk chesterton. he spent his career fighting against all this shit as it took root in english society.

>>17045099
Has anyone noticed that many eugenicists like Francis Galton and Karl Pearson came from Quaker families. What is it about the nonconformist Anglo Protestant that turns him into a soulless bugmen after he loses his faith?

>>17045560
Self-diagnosed?
If you’re a Euro then we need you but please toughen up cunt they’re barely a concern.

>>17047012
>>17047053
>>17047133
Nobody hates Anglos more than people speaking the English language, either self-hating Anglos themselves or cultural Anglos with their brains rewired by the self-hating Anglo world they inhabit into hating Anglos. And if you're a foreigner and hate Anglos, you might have Anglo blood. It's like how Jews also hate themselves, if you hate Jews you might be Jewish. None of this means Anglos or Jews are good or bad. It just means the hate identifies you as one of them. It's inescapable.

>>17047346
you haven't seen anglo hate until you meet the Quebecois, good lord

>>17044734
>Walden Two is a utopian novel written by behavioral psychologist B. F. Skinner, first published in 1948.
>Walden Two is controversial because its characters speak of a rejection of free will, including a rejection of the proposition that human behavior is controlled by a non-corporeal entity, such as a spirit or a soul. Walden Two embraces the proposition that the behavior of organisms, including humans, is determined by environmental variables, and that systematically altering environmental variables can generate a sociocultural system that very closely approximates utopia.

what sterile, diseased mind comes up with these things

>just spook yourself to raise the collective hedonic calculus bro

>>17047370
It makes sense, they're owned by an Anglo country and bred with those people, so what I said holds true, they're Anglified either by blood or cultural immersion no matter how French they keep themselves. So they take on the Anglo self-hating spirit.

John Milton was a bit of a bugman desu

>>17047453
Rawls explicitly rejected utilitarianism in AToJ but I agree that this kind of watered down Kantianism coupled with extensive use of "woah science cool graphs" is symptomatic of A*glo political theory

>>17044824
surprisingly pessimistic quote from the man. I figured he was a romantic after reading sorrows of young werther. I suppose this is one of his reflections from a later period of his life

>>17044350
Is this just /int/? None of these guys are at all interesting or unusual figures; you guys are just posting the equivalent to public intellectuals and saying, "look at how dumb they are!" Yes, of course they're dumb; they're public intellectuals.
This isn't any better a thread than something talking about Peterson or something.
Why isn't anyone posting about inferentialism or something? Even shitposting about p-zombies requires more erudition than literally anything in this thread.

>>17047319

noncormism is a disease. either they become soulless money-worshipping bugmen, or they become hypermoralistic activists crusading against every perceived failing of society in a crusade for a spotless utopia.

>>17047346
Unrelated to my post.

>>17047563
You are a retard, pretty much everyone posted in this thread is an actual intellectual no matter how much you hate them or look down on them (virtually of course because you are a mental midget and these people are giants).

>>17047563
>;;

>>17047623
They're intellectuals, sure, but they're public intellectuals being criticized for their public views (Russell, Bernard Shaw, Spencer, Singer for their politics rather than their actual views, as an example), usually in fields they don't spend most of their time in. That's why I said, "the equivalent to public intellectuals" instead of "public intellectuals." Sorry if I wasn't clear in saying so. Also, my criticism remains the same whether they are or aren't intellectuals; they're still the most popular, common, well-known ones, and the fact that the only criticism anyone can make is of them displays a lack of erudition.

>>17047680
By "actual views," I mean, "the views that they are known in academia for"

>>17047563
Everything you mentioned is irrelevant
> Why isn't anyone posting about inferentialism or something?
What does that have to do this thread? If you want a discussion about fucking semantics start one.
This thread is a criticism of intellectuals and their ideas and the culture that birthed them.
> Is this just /int/?
Holy shit you are a faggot.

>>17047799
I was criticizing the fact that everyone in this thread is dumb, as displayed by the fact that the only intellectuals they could name are popular ones.
I think you're either really stupid or ESL if you couldn't figure that out from my post.

>>17047833
> Noooooo!!! You guys can't talk about major philosophers!!
> You have to talk about obscure philosophers, semantics or other non sequiturs like p-zombies or else you aren't smart like me!!!11!

>>17044507
Neech was almost worst than the bugmen

What is the /lit/ explanation for why angloids are such bloodthirsty savages?

>>17044639
That sounds based desu

I double dog dare any of you self-hating Anglos ITT to say a word against pic related.

>>17048090
>I....hecking.....love.....EUGENICS!!

>>17048122
Yeah. Fuck letting more people be born with retard genes and genetic diseases.

>>17044639
Any of you decrying Galton should not have been born.

>>17048133
What’s wrong with people who have Down syndrome? The goal should be to eventually eliminate these diseases, which we can and will do eventually. There’s no need to remove people from the gene pool

>>17044507
How exactly was this a btfo? He just stated they were mediocre and appealed to the mediocre. I can btfo anyone with that strategy. Nietzsche is mediocre and appeals to medocre people.

>>17047934
Who are you quoting?

>>17048167
duplicated chromosomes

>>17044507
>Nietzsche calling fucking Darwin mediocre
Who the fuck does he think is

>>17046979
>He was a genius
Lol

ah its a seethe at atheism thread

also, that philosopher recently who said it is a moral imperative that we all have brain surgery to remove the possibility of pain

>>17048143
Any of you decrying decrying Galton should not have been born

Gibbon.

>>17044350
Popper was born in Austria but truly an angl*id at heart

>>17046062
Name a scientific insight. A bussinessman mobilized it.

>>17048185
A bit late but if you are still in this thread (and for anyone else vaguely interested)
this post >>17047934 gives you a tl;dr of the posts made by this faggot:
>>17047563
>>17047680
>>17047690
>>17047833
Always glad to be of service :)

What you're all referring to here is essentially positivism which although had its roots in Britain reached its zenith with two Germans, Frege and Wittgenstein (ok, Austrian in the second case), both of whom owed a great deal to Kant, another German. Why single out us Anglos?

>>17044350
Lets not forget this hack.
>>Most of what I have written in the last decade consists of attempts to tie in my social hopes – hopes for a global, cosmopolitan,democratic, egalitarian, classless, casteless society – with my antagonism towards Platonism.
Absolutely pathetic.

>>17048573
They hate us cuz they ain't us.

>>17048573
Even among logical positivists there is a great difference between the German Carnap and the *ngloid Ayer. The former is actually insightful the latter is a caricature of anglo arrogance.

>>17048573
Germans(including Austrians) are pretty cool!
The Vienna Circle is based and the closest philolsophy has ever gotten to being a science, too bad everyone in this thread are a bunch of seething psueds.

>>17048331
Name a modern day wickedness. A businessman probably mobilized it.

>>17048594
>arrogance

The continental tradition could be more easily defined as 'arrogant' by its confidence in human reason. How can you possibly call skepticism 'arrogant'?

>By the beginning of the 1900s, very few English aristocrat families hadn't intermarried with Jews. When they visited the Continent, Europeans were surprised to see Jewish- looking persons with English titles and accents.

>>17048705
because if you don't believe in human reason, what good is there in attempting to be understood?

>>17048631
That does not render irrelevant the previous.

>>17048705
Again, it's not the philosophical position that I'm calling arrogant. Both Carnap and Ayer had roughly similar positions, but there is a difference. It's the attitude the anglo has that he makes audacious claims (eg "this is meaningless, that is meaningless because I say so") with such unwarranted confidence and you can see he thinks he's very intelligent for it.

>>17048724
To take skepticism to its extreme, the great questions of philosophy simply can't be answered. To a lesser degree it at least allows us to identify our own biases. This is anything but 'arrogant'.

>>17048705
Human (more accurately sapient) reason itself is neccesarily unassailable. All that need be indentified afterwards is the philosophic potency or impotency of particular individuals.
Nothing more to it, why must there be?

>>17048765
*identified

>>17048762
>you can see he thinks he's very intelligent for it

That's an unwarranted assumption. Please provide evidence.

Oh boy have I got a good one. This man's name is John Money.
>He was one of the first researchers to publish theories on the influence of societal constructs of "gender" on individual formation of gender identity. Money introduced the terms gender identity, gender role and sexual orientation and popularised the term paraphilia.
>In 1966, a botched circumcision left eight-month-old Reimer without a penis. Money persuaded the baby's parents that sex reassignment surgery would be in Reimer's best interest. At the age of 22 months, Reimer underwent an orchiectomy, in which his testicles were surgically removed. He was reassigned to be raised as female and given the name Brenda. Money further recommended hormone treatment, to which the parents agreed. Money then recommended a surgical procedure to create an artificial vagina, which the parents refused. Money published a number of papers reporting the reassignment as successful.
>During subsequent appointments with Reimer and Reimer's twin brother Brian, Money forced the two to rehearse sexual acts, with David playing the bottom role as his brother "[pressed] his crotch against" David's buttocks. Money also forced the two children to strip for "genital inspections", occasionally taking photos. Money justified these acts by claiming that "childhood 'sexual rehearsal play'" was important for a "healthy adult gender identity".
>For several years, Money reported on Reimer's progress as the "John/Joan case", describing apparently successful female gender development and using this case to support the feasibility of sex reassignment and surgical reconstruction even in non-intersex cases. Notes by a former student at Money's laboratory state that, during the yearly follow-up visits, Reimer's parents routinely lied to staff about the success of the procedure. Reimer's twin brother, Brian, later developed schizophrenia.
>On July 1, 2002, Brian was found dead from an overdose of antidepressants. On May 4, 2004, after suffering years of severe depression, financial instability, and marital troubles,[29] David committed suicide by shooting himself in the head with a sawed-off shotgun at the age of 38. Reimer's parents have stated that Money's methodology was responsible for the deaths of both of their sons.
The first sex reassignment surgery began with an Anglo and a botched circumcision, and it ended with two suicides. Not a story the Anglos would tell.

>>17048779
Lmao how can I provide evidence for the style of expression? It's not an empirical phenomenon so I can't conduct experiments dear anglo. Go read anglo works and you'll see it.

>>17048573
Logical positivism had little to do with social positivism as espoused by the demons posted here although granted logical positivists (especially Neurath) treated their project as a part of larger network of efforts intended to build a socialist society
>>17048579
Very much this, pragmatism is peak bugman although Rorty seemed at least self-aware about its implications

>>17048763
What good is a philosophy which fails at extremes?

>>17048781
Literally the devil's act.

>>17048781
>For several years, Money reported on Reimer's progress as the "John/Joan case". Money wrote, "The child's behavior is so clearly that of an active little girl and so different from the boyish ways of her twin brother."[27] Notes by a former student at Money's lab state that, during the follow-up visits, which occurred only once a year, Reimer's parents routinely lied to lab staff about the success of the procedure. The twin brother, Brian, later developed schizophrenia.
>By the age of 13 years, Reimer was experiencing suicidal depression and he told his parents he would take his own life if they made him see Money again.[29] Finally, on March 14, 1980, Reimer's parents told him the truth about his gender reassignment,[30] following advice from Reimer's endocrinologist and psychiatrist. At 14, having been informed of his past by his father, Reimer decided to assume a male gender identity, calling himself David. He underwent treatment to reverse the reassignment, including testosterone injections, a double mastectomy, and phalloplasty operations.
>For the first thirty years after Money's initial report that the reassignment had been a success, Money's view of the malleability of gender became the dominant viewpoint among physicians and doctors, reassuring them that sexual reassignment was the correct decision in certain instances, resulting in thousands of sexual reassignments.
>For the first thirty years after Money's initial report that the reassignment had been a success, Money's view of the malleability of gender became the dominant viewpoint among physicians and doctors, reassuring them that sexual reassignment was the correct decision in certain instances, resulting in thousands of sexual reassignments.

>>17048781
He also spoke in favor of pedophilia.

>>17048705
> Continental Philosophy
> Reason
Mental Gymnastics != Reason anon

>>17048950
He probably means the meme trio and maybe Kant. the empiricists were Britbongs

>>17044350
Cool

>>17044532
The vertically-oriented nasal bridge and low-set nasolabial region are features of the ancient Romans.
English people basically used to be 50% Anglo-saxon, 50% Roman.
This eventually got diluted with a bunch of French, Irish, and Welsh, and now today you've got something like 35% middle-eastern in there as well.
This is why usually only the oldest of stone-faced lanky codgers still have that Roman-English nose and lower-face.

>>17049011
Meant for >>17044949

>>17049011
this is completely wrong though

>>17048781
Unironically Satanic.

>>17048781
What is this Angloid phenotype called?

>>17045590
>>17045634
I'll try to refute him:
So his criticism of induction is there is no way to rationally justify it. But this assertion itself is inductive. So consequently there is no way to rationally justify this criticism.
So: we can acknowledge our own lack of knowledge but this is still positive knowledge. It makes no sense to doubt inductive experience (ie we don't know that the sun will rise tomorrow) that has no counterexample, but inductive experience that is a counterexample forces us to come up with more comprehensive systems of representation (ie physics before and after relativity, etc) which approach absolute knowing.

Humebros feel free to shit on me if any of this is wrong

>>17049416
the spectre haunting /lit/ has returned

>>17049416
Anon I'm a real Humebro, most of /lit/ hasn't read Hume and if they have they haven't read the Treatise and have sorely misread the Enquiry. They don't understand that Hume was never trying to undermine either induction or causal belief. Hume's point is the opposite: He's trying to prove that some beliefs (what he calls 'natural beliefs') are simply inescapable, but they're not for that reason rational in the sense of deductive reasoning proving them right. His point isn't that we should reject what's not rational. On the contrary: his point is that we should give in to the inescapable. He says this in both the Treatise and the Enquiry. If we stopped believing causally, if we stopped inducing, we'd be like Pyrrhonian skeptics, and straight up die. He calls his form of skepticism 'mitigated skepticism' and strongly distances it from what he calls Pyrrhonian skepticism. The funny thing, from what I've been told, is that Sextus Empiricus would have been more like Hume than not. Which means that even the Pyrrhonians are misread. Everyone historically misreads skeptics. The true skeptics of history always conclude, rightly, that there's a certain inescapable nature to some of our beliefs, but they want to stress that this doesn't make them rational. It just means we're blameless, in a sense, to keep following them. And they would point out we basically can't help but continuing this way. So there's nothing contradictory in the end for Hume. He always accepted induction, and causal reasoning. Anyone who tells you otherwise has NOT studied Hume as much as they think.

>>17047053
Yes. I was gonna say that but he liked Spencer too and considered himself an "anarchist in the spencerian way". More like a shitpost anyway.

>>17048781
>>17048832
Damn this is true evil. Worse than a thousand serial killers.

>>17049485
sounds pretty based

>>17049323
big collar

>>17049485
good post

Bumping this cursed thread.

>>17049485
Pretty interesting and good post.

>>17048781
Why wasn't he murdered???

Pretty much all orthodox economists, behavioral economists(muh nudging) rational choice theorists, pragmatists, The I Love Science crowd. All anglo-judaic-amerimutt bugmen

>>17050029
>haha wow dude a machine which can release liquid
Ignoring the utter disgust at what these "pills" actually entail, he's a disgusting pretentious inauthentic moron anyway.

>>17044350
I have a feeling that most posters here are Americans and also have Anglo blood themselves

>>17050118
Transethnics lol

bump

>>17044460
Seething. Darwin wrote well and mentions God throughout his most famed work, even in the final paragraph, the creator is given as the original source of life.
Darwin was based
>inb4 believing in God doesn’t make him Christian
I know, he was based

>>17044852
All true collectivists love eugenics

I’ve never seen a bigger pack of nonces in me life.

>>17045473
Does Singer value the life of a endangered panda fetus more than the life of a human fetus?

>>17052188
depends on the consent of the panda mom

>>17044411
I can't believe bentham isn't a meme

>>17044455
>early life
Portuguese origin, absolutely revolting.

>>17050029
Isn't this edited?

>>17044970
A long nose is perfectly well if it's paired with strong features in other respects (tall brow, strong jaw, bold cheekbones), producing a Roman face.
On its own, or with middling features, it's the mark of the unrepentant bureaucrat.

>>17044411
I wish I knew about this guy before. I used to pass by UCL every week and apparently they display his head there.

>>17045094
He's irrelevant

>>17052246
based neo-phrenology poster

>>17044411
I TURNED MYSELF INTO AN AUTOMATON MILL!

I'M AUTOMATON JEREMY!!!

>>17052397
no, seriously - what the FUCK was this guy's problem? why did he decide to put that in his last will?

>>17052417
to make nerds seethe for centuries

>>17052417
He determined it to be useful within the precepts of utilitarianism. This act retroactively refuted all his work and thereby subsequently all utilitarian philosophers after him.

Oh woah look, a thread full of envious racists.

>>17052446
but didn't he decrease the overall utility that way?

>>17052459
imagine being too dumb to even read a midwit /lit/ thread about bugmen and your feeble brain casts around for some way to process what it's seeing and comes up with 'le racists', good god I hope you have something to catch your drool

>>17046331
How is that based?

>>17045244
/lit/ dislikes Anglos because they have produced some of the strangest and probably harmful new strains of thought of the last few centuries. This is not about Anglos as writers of prose or poetry, but as intellectuals. Anglo intellectuals often have an overly mechanical approach to human problems, and would rather make mankind conform to a bizarre theoretical system than design a system that conforms to the needs of man. This mindset led Anglos to the Industrial Revolution first, and they were so devoted that it became a capital offense to smash factory looms, killing the Luddite movement. This is to say England in the 19th century is what America is to the 21st - a force for rapid social change whose proponents see no possible harm in what they're doing. It is pretty closely tied to progressivism, both then and now. Its modern offspring is Silicon valley.

Like most stereotypes, it doesn't apply to all Anglos, but it's a notable element in Anglo thought that's not nearly so common elsewhere.

>>17044666
>>17044639
I assumed you were talking about Edmund Spenser, as unleashing the Fairy Queen upon this world was far worse than any political policy in the 19th century. I might not understand this board.

>>17049485
>give in to the inescapable
What does this mean? And where to start?

>>17052529
The Industrial revolution was caused by several inventions and discoveries, it had nothing to do with political philosophy

as for 'overly mechanical approach to human problems', the Germans are just as bad, especially Marx

How has he not been posted yet?

>>17052553
Kinda. I think people give Anglos more shit for what they did with Finance and Management.

>>17052553
>as for 'overly mechanical approach to human problems', the Germans are just as bad, especially Marx
check my post here >>17045194 with a quote from Oswald Spengler's Prussianism and Socialism, Marx was a spiritual (or rather aspiritual) A*glo
>>17052554
he's not as transparently demonic as the other people posted here, he also made some effort to build a soulfull moral theory in Theory of Moral Sentiments

>>17052566
you know that shit originated with a certain group of Dutchmen just as much as Anglos, even more really chronologically

>>17052554
are we counting scots as anglos now?

>>17052553
>Marx
No, as pointed out by based Spengler and quoted by this anon right here: >>17045194, Germany can't be blamed for Marx because Marx was angloid in spirit. He even moved to London and became fully anglo in mind and body.

>>17052582
yes, A*glos have unleashed so many evil spirits onto this world that only claiming Ossian as one of their own can redeem them
>>17052583
desu Hegel was the only remaining link between Marx and uniquely German thought after he had moved to London and started reading the political economists, I am convinced that if Darwin's theories had already been in circulation Marx would've dumped Hegel and restated his theory using terminology and way of thinking imported from evolutionary biology

>>17045590
>Isn't that a belief in itself?
Cringe

>another thread on the catalog that is exactly the same but reversed
This board is so shit.

>>17051544
I'm French and have now lived in England for five years. In that time I became increasingly appreciative of English (and American, Australian, etc) anti-intellectualism.
This trait of English speaking nations often seems strange in the rest of the world, but is entirely justified. Any nation that develops the types of "intellectual" traditions shown ITT will become either insane or anti-intellectual.
Anglos (I mean the large part of the population) made the right choice. The successes, beautiful and great things done by Englishmen were done in spite of, not due to the people posted in the thread.

>>17052489
>midwit

>>17048316
Wittgenstein, part Anglo that he is (in philosophy that is, in lifestyle he is far more respectable) should have fucking killed him with the poker when he had the chance

>>17044551
ITT: seething ESLs

>>17053660
Dryden believed that poetry had ""'"progressed""" like muh science and technology. He was a redditor.

>>17052241
Retard numale midwit bugman. Cuck.

>>17044350
TOLKIEN is the greatest Anglo bugman. He was the first fantasy author to put his mythology into a rigid autistic system wherein they become devoid of both meaning and aesthetic quality - he lamented the passing of meaning from the world, but in reality he was the great destroyer: he has dealt immense damage both to fantasy literature and the human mind
People who become "fans" of Middle-Earth or some Tolkienesque world are like prisoners trapped inside a polyhedron whose every face is a mirror that reflects the other faces and their reflections ad infinitum
But to this monstrous edifice there is no depth, nothing below the surface: one shallow aesthetic idea refers to one another in a hyperlink nightmare
Leave it to a Catholic to come up with the best representation of purgatory

>>17054087
This is of course an act of psychoterrorism, and Tolkien's books (and derivatives) psychic weapons used to assault the minds of readers worldwide - they are a public health hazard: all copies of them should be seized by the police and burnt

>>17054087
Tolkien did a very competent job of integrating Pagan myths with a Catholic deity and theodicy, you are simply a fag.

>>17054281
Trissino already did it in 1547 and it was also shit then

>>17044507
if by BTFO you mean fancily-worded ad-hominem attack, then yes. you couldn't find a better quote for this?

>>17050118
Lol pretty much

>>17045017
the outcome of the English revolution of 1688 was the worst of both worlds

>>17045017
very clearly a result of post-Napoleonic Victorian autism, as Britain became mistress of the world she lost her soul - a process analogous to fall of the Republic and the rise of the Empire in Rome

>>17044350
anglos: the lizard race

The french invented both positivism and naturalism.
Just look at this shit https://www.marxists.org/archive/zola/1893/experimental-novel.htm

>>17052548

I guess it means making a leap of faith, accepting that you can't find an objective ground for your belief. Accept that this leap is not rational and subjective. It is humbling, but inherently conservative (Hume was a tory after all). problem is, that it isn't enough, because it will lead to sterile Burkean, Buckleyan conservatism.

>>17052826

Indeed. the "simple as" mentality is a good realistic, conservative attitude to hold for your average person. it is also anti-intellectual though, which is dangerous. The vita contemplativa must not be neglected.

>Any nation that draws too great a distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools

Note of interest; Catholicism or atleast high Anglicanism has historically been a preserving shield for some reason.

>>17044507
You call that a btfo?
>Do the English have a Quixote or Simplicius? Perhaps in Lucifer or the very laws of Shakespeare. The great period of English art precedes the European, in time and law. One may roughly equate this to the difference between the Hundred Years War and the Thirty Years War, between Shakespeare and Goethe. England is ahead of Europe in time, it already knew what would be experienced by it, and had to defend itself in the coming into being of law. Thus 1789 is for the French a horror, for the Germans an artwork, and the English a historical document. But only the English could maintain the monarchy as L'art pour l'art.

Thus, also, the purity of the technical vision in the English mind. The small island, which, only there, could a Christ be born of the secular world. The fantasies of Maistre seem pathetic in comparison to seas of lemonade and dolphins pulling city-ships to lands of salvation - even in its ridiculous nature the English vision is closer to Hesiod. One at least remembers the Autoicon, even if ridiculous, as a sacrilege to both the religious and secular order. Bismarck appears as little more than a fool before power, a child monarch playing with sandcastles; Hitler an aberration of the monstrous, bearing none of the bad qualities, let alone the good. Nietzsche only triumphs over time where he attempts to recreate the efforts of Cromwell over his sister - the extent of his world less than that of even Kant, and thus UnterAngloean. One must not discount the impoverishment of Europe where the political laws formed of the founding of the empire of the New World could never have been known to them. The aristocracy is also an impoverished form, they were a bourgeoisie before even England announced the Industrial order - the peasantry abandoned unconsciously along with the whole of their nations.

>>17054882
what does this rambling even mean?

>>17054882
Based
>>17055185
Clearly it means that you're a brainlet.

>>17054882
What is this anon, google doesn't come up with anything

>>17052236
kek

>>17054882
I don't know what you're arguing or which side you're on, but I know for a fact that you're a faggot.

>>17044764
Actually understandable because Scholasticism deprived the Catholic Church of Christianity's metaphysical depth

>>17055594
Based
>>17055496
You are a brainlet pretending to understand what this schizo >>17054882 is saying.

>>17055537
It's just my notes on the subject, basically a rough essay attempting to place the death of England within the death of Europe. For all its supposed Nietzschean character, the current right-wing can only attempt a pathetic resentment of physiognomy and the victor nations - which were, paradoxically, not even the victors. Why this is significant should be obvious.

Some selections, starting with a Junger quote on Hume:

"It should here be noted that the classic idea of a rounded education, confined as it was to the formation of culture and wisdom, stands in sharp opposition to the idea of an encyclopedia of sciences, that is, to a knowledge which is arrayed alphabetically like a dictionary or encyclopedia. The idea of an encyclopedia of sciences belongs to the eighteenth century. Knowledge of that description has been the forerunner of all modern technical science. It is the knowledge of a Diderot, a D'Alembert, a La Mettrie, who declared all philosophic thought to be null and void, who in works such as Histoire naturelle de l'ame and L'homme machine advocated an empiricism in which everything is explained in terms of causal reflexes between brain and body. The thought of Hume, their English contemporary , is stronger and finer, but his doctrine of the association of ideas, and the principles of all possible associations (he assumes similarity, contiguity in time and space, and cause or effect) lead to the same result (Philosophical Essays Concerning Human Understanding and An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding). According to Hume, perceptions are not in need of a substance that carries them, for all substances are merely composites of simple concepts and thought. These theories of associative thinking always tend to make the associations materially independent. However, to associate is not yet to think; in fact, the special capacity for association characteristic of many a clever head appears to be rather a substitute for independent thought. Hume may be considered the spiritual father of Joyce's Ulysses, a book that makes association independent, and destroys every intellectual order so radically that nothing is left but a great garbage pile of associations."

>>17055730
There is no more telling sign of the age than the fact that nations are reducible to the lowest individual types. On the one hand, Kierkegaard's comment on the nihilist discourse of anonymous beings can be mapped onto the entire geopolitical situation - in all the dystopian visions of war very few pictured powderless convoys ramming one another along the roads of the potential hotzones. The Russian and American borderline forever in motion, and only the Russian seems at peace with this. There is nothingness, a great void drawing in all states to a single formlessness, and yet nations march onwards as if the tectonic plates had already formed an impenetrable wall; diplomatic reason only serves as a further plate of division and conquering mechanism over the anonymous. One sees the highest violence, but only the ridiculous remains, it cannot even be seen as a comedy. This ridiculous quality was already seen in the 19th century, even in the decline of the monarchy, whether in the physiognomic or the relation to metaphysical law, however, even in this late age death still had the capacity to tear one away from such a world, as we see in Tolstoy's account of Count Bezukhov. The wealth of being is resigned to that which escapes the fate of the nation. Bezukhov's death is the death of the old nations, only on this level the scale of time is increased and we are incapable of seeing the rites, let alone the beauty of such moments.

>>17055742
...

The impossible sacrifice of Europe, one with the abolition of slavery, but also the centuries of reparations. The Englishman in his colony sees a simple image of the death of Europe: the broad axe which shall bring down the entire continent, its sovereign figures, while also carving out the new life of nobility within paradise. Only in these lands does the noble figure endure, beyond law and the fear of nature. Only the Anglo can overcome himself, there will be no totality of law, no friend and enemy - such distinctions are worthless. Europe creates the technological sickness, entire mobilisations against the old world, while English pragmatism uses the same tool for colonisation and blinding of the old world.

"I beg you, nephew, do not waste your knowledge on philology." Carl Schmitt's uncle saved him from the dying ship venturing into seas that a German could never understand. "Goethe did not understand the Greeks." Nietzsche's prognosis is unconsciously positive, Goethe's refusal to resurrect the Greeks with a hammer was the only possible path for Europe. In each age the hammer signifies its own law: from war tool to simple device uncovering the layers of earth which are nothing more than a memory of death. The ugliness of the Greek death is equal to its life potential, something Nietzsche should have known.

No one any longer studies the unknown figures of the 18th century, if they did it would be clear to what extent all essential things have been forgotten. The Germans turned to philosophy where art had been dominated by the other nations, a lebensraum which precedes in the metaphysical territory by two or three hundred years. Heine warned us of this, as well as the endless war within the invisible forces. The cold war of Europe occurs within the pantheistic relation.

>>17055752
...

In another sense, one must conclude that Nietzsche was right about everything. There is no worse death than that experienced in the Gold or Iron Age; Germany endures only in the most brutal spirit, the idyllic is the total loss of the highest laws of the world and its brutal potential. Zeus can only succeed in the Bronze Age, or the Heroic - in all others he is less than human. Thus the forest must grow at all costs; in this the mythic character of the Modern German, that which cannot be secularized, reduced to the mundane.

What is the founding of life in the New World is revisited upon the Europeans, the deadening of forests becomes the totality of law. The Livens Projector destroys more than total mobilisation, or rather, completes its spirit from within forgotten metaphysical laws.

Here we see the horror of practical concerns. Whatever remained of the Anglo peasantry was willing to become the total sacrifice of nature, while the German remained attached to the earth - forgetting its pantheistic laws that all growth of the forest is necessitated by death. The German succumbed to the Anglo in spirit, in acknowledging that the Queen of the Forest, that Saxon blood had lived on, if only in what seemed, pragmatically, in the final effort, to be a decisive sorting of the dead. Willingly, the Anglo ascended to German myth better than the Germans themselves. The Anglo admonished itself of all Christian laws to become Christian. There is no other answer. The extent of the empire speaks for itself.

Holderlin speaks to this: the forest must also remind us of the trees, without this, character is merely an abstraction. Germany could not complete its philosophical project, and thus could not return to any artistic endeavour equivalent to the art of the age. Here purely practical concerns reveal their superiority, like the worker who mines the stones of the Colossus: he cannot envision the plan which has already formed

>>17055768
you should put it on a blog when you're done and post something on here to tell us with a keyword so I can find it in archvies

>>17055698
>t. samefag who doesn't read

>>17055824
Sure. I'll try to do a thread on Junger's Hume quote.
Keywords "death europe england junger hume".
My internet kicked out because of the storm here so don't know if I can do anything else tonight.

>>17044350
On the origin of species by Darwin

>>17044350
>I'll start with John Stuart Mill.
Criticising the single greatest exponent of free speech on a board that only exists because it has a semblance of free speech while extoling a tudor propagandist and a faggot

>>17055768
>In another sense, one must conclude that Nietzsche was right about everything.
In the edgy teen sense or the retard sense?

>>17056856
Free speech was a mistake

>>17057469
Free Speech is an extended Anglo phenotype

>>17054087
>People who become "fans" of Middle-Earth or some Tolkienesque world

except he hated every form of fandom or canon. neither did he establish some dogmatic literary form for following fantasy or mythology "genre". don't know what you are angry about.

>>17056856
Even if that was true, that wouldn't compensate for all his terrible takes and the influence he gave then. Psychologism would have been btfo much before Husserl without him. Logic and epistemology wouldn't have been stunted. Utilitarianism was declining even in England before he gave it its second life that still poisons Anglos to this day. Fabian socialism took all its inspiration from him. His brand of "good natured imperialism" is abhorent trash that left its mark as far as the Jewish American neoconservatives. Let's not even go into the more memetic topics like feminism, etc.
But Mill is far, very far from the "single greatest exponent of free speech". He gave intellectually weak half assed works on the subject because he was butthurt some of his opinions were not well received. His claims on free speech clash so clearly with the rest of his nanny state worldview it could never be a serious defense. More importantly, he blurred the free speech question by completely shifting the subject away from court protection towards social engineering. He turned the comparatively rigorous discussion of legal theory into a mess of sociology. It is ridiculous to see him praised as a great defender of freedom of speech when he had contemporaries like the Spanish or French liberals.