/lit/ - Literature

>>17467608
BUILT

LOL you haven't read him? GTFO of /lit/ you brainlet. EVOLA (pbuh) is BASED and REDPILLED, something you (a woman) wouldnt understand anything about.

I’m attracted to a specific few personality types in women, to the point that I can look at a girl anyone else would describe as a 10 and feel no attraction whatsoever. It wouldn’t be such a problem if it weren’t so easy to tell everything about a girl’s personality just by looking at her face

ive read like 40% of his tiger book and thought it was gay as fuck

I’m so honely & lorny...

>>17467843
based /tv/ crossposter

>>17467608
He’s way to wordy and drawn out. tries to make a mountain of a molehill

>>17467608
He's got a very original worldview and a very rigorous approach to existential topics. All of the Traditionalists offer a compelling and interesting way of understanding spirituality and human civilisation, but Evola has a specific slant towards action and autonomy that the others do not. I have seen no other thinkers like him anywhere.
BTW you deserve to burn in hell for thotposting because it brings all the mouthbreathers directly to your thread, as you can see.

>>17467608
read RtT right after I read Thus Spoke Zarathustra.
Evola has certain interesting observations, but is imo deluded and builds on a questionable ethic. The weirdest thing is how he doesn't doubt himself being right about everything.. but the most cringe thing about him is how he pretty much derives all his eso-stuff from fucking perverted Tantra and just totally ignores all the rest that's coming from the East and just claims his understanding of tantric doctrines to be the full extent of Eastern thought.
cringe guy indeed, somewhat educated though (although him not finishing eng "because muh higher interests" is a cope)

>>17467608
Yeah. I’ve read a lot of Evola. I can count the number of good takes on him that I’ve read on one hand. He is actually a complex and misunderstood author.

>>17468380
>I can count the number of good takes on him that I’ve read on one hand.
This thread is not an exception so far btw.

> Whats so epic about him?

nothing. overated. meme-tier

>>17468397
come and argue against me >>17468349, I'll be waiting

>>17468349
>The weirdest thing is how he doesn't doubt himself being right about everything
He's written very extensively on all types of intellectual traditions, so I don't see what exactly you want of him. He's obviously acquainted with alternate viewpoints.
>ut the most cringe thing about him is how he pretty much derives all his eso-stuff from fucking perverted Tantra and just totally ignores all the rest that's coming from the East and just claims his understanding of tantric doctrines to be the full extent of Eastern thought.
Make an argument on why you believe this to be the case.

OP here, what should I read before starting Evola?

>>17468432
>>The weirdest thing is how he doesn't doubt himself being right about everything
>He's written very extensively on all types of intellectual traditions, so I don't see what exactly you want of him. He's obviously acquainted with alternate viewpoints.
That's not even an argument against what you quoted. I have to admit that in RtT, he states who the book is written for and that you pretty much have to be on the same page ethically, so that justifies him keeping that worldview as the one right ideology... doesn't change anything about the fact that the ethic is questionable and is used to argue likely all the ideas in the book.
As I said, he has several very interesting observations concerning many intellectual traditions, but that's the only thing making him worth reading in my eyes.
>>ut the most cringe thing about him is how he pretty much derives all his eso-stuff from fucking perverted Tantra and just totally ignores all the rest that's coming from the East and just claims his understanding of tantric doctrines to be the full extent of Eastern thought.
>Make an argument on why you believe this to be the case.
You can't want me to find the specific segments in his books, but just look at how he defines karma and dharma, even stating, look how I'm right about it and most others are wrong.. but most importantly, you can read through his metaphysical books and see that he was just a tantric pervert.
>>17468457
everything.. iirc RtT had a list of authors one should have read before heading towards Evola's stuff

>>17468521
He profits from being a contrarian. Contrarianism makes thoughtless readers believe the contrarian to be very clever.. somehow 4c is super prone to this, sucking contrarian's cocks since 2003

>>17468457
You don't necessarily need to read anything, but depending on what book you start with, you might benefit from some Nietzsche or Otto Weininger.
>>17468521
>That's not even an argument against what you quoted. I have to admit that in RtT, he states who the book is written for and that you pretty much have to be on the same page ethically, so that justifies him keeping that worldview as the one right ideology... doesn't change anything about the fact that the ethic is questionable and is used to argue likely all the ideas in the book.
What is that supposed to mean? Were you expecting some form of philosophy like Kant when you picked up Ride the Tiger? Evola advances a certain form of metaphysics and worldview, his writing is most useful for those who want to see the world through new eyes or who wish to better understand their own character. As you rightly pointed out, systematic philosophical proof is not a concern of the book and I would say not a concern of Evola either, as he believed that those who align with his values would seek out his analysis without the need of any theorising. He did not believe in persuasion, but rather in the influence and importance of character.
>You can't want me to find the specific segments in his books, but just look at how he defines karma and dharma, even stating, look how I'm right about it and most others are wrong.. but most importantly, you can read through his metaphysical books and see that he was just a tantric pervert.
I am not asking you for any passages, I am asking you to build a case for it. I will be the one quoting passages if I disagree, which I am sure I do. What are your objections to his definitions of karma and dharma? Who do you mean by "most others"? The only ones that I have consistently seen him polemicise against are the Theosophists and his reasoning for that is very clear and hardly just an empty assertion of superiority. I completely disagree with your comments on Tantra as well. In fact, I struggle to see where you saw him express any personal opinion on Tantra at all, since to my recollection all he does is describe and analyse Tantra. Furthermore, he does not derive his esoteric positions from Tantra but from world Tradition, including the Hermetics, Neoplatonists and also most notably - the Buddhists, whom you seem to be forgetting when you claim he only pays attention to Tantra among all the Eastern traditions.
>>17468546
Given Evola's emphasis on autonomy and positive values, how did you reach the conclusion that he is a contrarian - a position which presupposes a subscription to dialectics and bilateralism?

>>17467608
its just hinduism but more racist
I mean if you're into that then sure

>>17467608
Nothing, it's LARP and cope for tradcucks.
>RIDE THE TIGER!!!!!
I.e. do literally nothing while "civilization collapses"

>>17467608
Introduction to Magic (all volumes), The Hermetic Tradition, and The Mystery of the Grail are all definitely great sources on Esotericism.

>>17468720
>What is that supposed to mean? Were you expecting some form of philosophy like Kant when you picked up Ride the Tiger? Evola advances a certain form of metaphysics and worldview, his writing is most useful for those who want to see the world through new eyes or who wish to better understand their own character. As you rightly pointed out, systematic philosophical proof is not a concern of the book and I would say not a concern of Evola either, as he believed that those who align with his values would seek out his analysis without the need of any theorising. He did not believe in persuasion, but rather in the influence and importance of character.
(just needed to quote the whole thing)
Again, although a reaction to something I wrote, this doesn't attack what I said. but ok, I'll react.
Yes, he builds a world view and as I said, built upon questionable ethic (similarly to Nietzsche).
>his writing is most useful for those who want to see the world through new eyes
>new eyes
on the other hand, he openly states he aims to write for likeminded (see beginning of RtT), I'd say his own motivation was to sum up theses aligning with a worldview he holds.

>Hermetics, Neoplatonists
correct, but not eastern
>most notably - the Buddhists
only where they align with tantra
>What are your objections to his definitions of karma and dharma? Who do you mean by "most others"?
That I wrote as a reaction to what he explicitly writes about these two in RtT, wouldn't be able to find it now, but I think the sentence goes something like "..defining karma.., which is completely different from what others believed it was".
>where you saw him express any personal opinion on Tantra at all, since to my recollection all he does is describe and analyse Tantra
Well, the parts of RtT concerning sex are crystal clear in this sense.. if that isn't enough, you have the whole of Metaphysics of sex
>contrarian - a position which presupposes a subscription to dialectics and bilateralism
well, that's a new one
Are you really saying Evola isn't a contrarian? A thinker trying to debunk left and right everything outside of his own abominable worldview?

>>17468801
Have to agree. Especially with The Hermetic Tradition.

>>17468777
People can't control the times. nobody is saving civilization. Maybe if you happen to have the right traits which allow you to breed your posterity will be able to rebuild culture if they don't become victims. For many people, the only thing to do is forge the path of the heroic individual.

>>17468349
>how he pretty much derives all his eso-stuff from fucking perverted Tantra
Most of his esoteric stuff is more near east than eastern...

>>17468898
Absolutely. I forgot to add that, to me, Revolt Against The Modern World is not a political work but a skeleton key to occultism. I think he successfully elucidated what figures like Manly P. Hall and H.P. Blavatsky attempted to but they incidentally obfuscated with misinformation. He's not infallible, but he's up there with the greatest authors on these topics.

>>17468777
>I.e. do literally nothing while "civilization collapses"
You have never read Evola.
>>17468858
>Yes, he builds a world view and as I said, built upon questionable ethic (similarly to Nietzsche).
There are some similarities to Nietzsche in regard to the general view of nihilism, but the ethic that should be adopted in the face of the problem is rather different. Nietzsche's thought leads to an exaltation of Life, will to power and a drive to usher in the age of the Ubermensch. Evola dismisses all of this and instead refers to the value of pure experience and in particular spiritual experience.
>on the other hand, he openly states he aims to write for likeminded (see beginning of RtT), I'd say his own motivation was to sum up theses aligning with a worldview he holds.
Yes, I wrote that part because he revolutionised my worldview. If my worldview was similar to his before, I certainly did not notice it.
>correct, but not eastern
I was just giving an example.
>only where they align with tantra
How do Buddhism and Tantra align? Evola wrote the Doctrine of Awakening and the Yoga of Power because he conceived of them as two completely separate paths that lead to the same goal - Buddhism is the path that aims to overcome the body and reach for pure spirit, and Tantra the path that aims to use the potential of the body to access the spirit.
>That I wrote as a reaction to what he explicitly writes about these two in RtT, wouldn't be able to find it now, but I think the sentence goes something like "..defining karma.., which is completely different from what others believed it was".
If you don't even remember what you are objecting to, then I am not really concerned with rebutting it.
>Well, the parts of RtT concerning sex are crystal clear in this sense.. if that isn't enough, you have the whole of Metaphysics of sex
I have read both of those, but I have not seen him express any personal opinion on the matter. He has written on the difficulties of family life and the difficulties of discovering genuine value in modern relationships, but he is by no means an unconditional supporter of promiscuity. Instead, he asserts everybody's right to react to the current climate freely.
>Are you really saying Evola isn't a contrarian? A thinker trying to debunk left and right everything outside of his own abominable worldview?
Ooh, abominable? Now we're getting into the fun stuff. Well, yes - I am saying that Evola is not a contrarian. A contrarian disagrees for the sake of disagreement and his position is derived entirely from the proposition that he is disagreeing with. Evola has articulated specific, positive values in pretty much all of his books which he uses as the criteria to judge political positions on the left and the right. He is not simply reacting to mainstream positions and rejecting them, but rather he stands for a set of values from the perspective of which all contemporary movements fall short.

>>17467648

please tell me more

Preparing for Evola.
Since I cannot exit this ride I may as well accelerate

>>17467608
I read 3 books of his, but didnt find him as good as guenon. However, i cannot help but admire that he didnt really LARP, he really tried to live the life that he was professing, even when it almost killed him.

>>17468949
Yet to read revolt or ride the tiger because of apprehensions about them being too political.
I like that he provides a lot of solid references and sources in his works too. Mystery of the Grail is quite a short book but can finish it with another dozen works and authors to follow up.

>>17469001
SNU SNU

>>17467608
how do i get a gf like this bros???

>>17469001
>However, i cannot help but admire that he didnt really LARP, he really tried to live the life that he was professing, even when it almost killed him.

I'm not familiar with his life and works, what did he do?

>>17468971
>There are some similarities to Nietzsche in regard to the general view of nihilism, but
I just meant they both build upon questionable ethic (each their own), which narrows their ideas down to a very opinionated set of theses.
>If you don't even remember what you are objecting to, then I am not really concerned with rebutting it.
Yes I'm really not going to search for it in the book.
>not seen him express any personal opinion on the matter
literally what I said, the segment in RtT on sex.. it's not even that fucking long
>promiscuity
not what tantra's about
>A contrarian disagrees for the sake of disagreement
Not necessarily, just one who disagrees with something widely believed, which Evola certainly does

Anyway, this was my last reply in this matter, it's getting late over here

>>17467608
If you have to read him, OP, take what he writes with a grain of salt. Ideologies like this can mess with ones head, especially if you chose to play along his crippled ethic he builds upon

>>17469047
>Criticized Mussolini when this could mean certain death
>Was a mountaineer because it brought him closer to the Divine
>Went on a walk during an air raid to ponder his destiny (he was paralyzed during one of these raids).
The last one is especially stupid, but hey

>>17467851
cringe reddit tier wanting to tell everyone he understands the reference

>>17469037
just get a cat

>>17469047
He revolted against the modern world, basically. He tied that motivation to everything he did - his art, his participation in esoteric circles and his books on spirituality, his political texts which had their enemies not just among liberals but also in certain fascist circles, his years as a soldier in the first world war and his political work during the second world war and in his postwar cultural and political works also. I assume that the anon you responded to also had Evola's injury in mind when he wrote his comment - his lower body was paralysed after shrapnel hit his spine when he was taking one of his deliberate walks during an Allied bombing run in Vienna.

>>17469094
cringe reddit tier wanting to tell everyone that the other poster wanted to tell everyone that she/he understands the reference

>>17469078
>I just meant they both build upon questionable ethic (each their own), which narrows their ideas down to a very opinionated set of theses.
I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.
>Yes I'm really not going to search for it in the book.
It's not about searching, you are discussing his views on karma and dharma and you don't even remember what those views are.
>literally what I said, the segment in RtT on sex.. it's not even that fucking long
Yes, I have read it, multiple times. What about it? It's not like he says "yooo slay that pussy bro or you're a cucked fag, fr". All he does is explain the vapidity of modern marriage and sexual relations. He is not the first person to do that. People have been critiquing marriage and "the sexual revolution" for a very long time.
>not what tantra's about
I wasn't talking about Tantra in that passage, I was talking about the RtT chapter on sex, which you brought up.
>Not necessarily, just one who disagrees with something widely believed, which Evola certainly does
This is not what contrarian means.

>>17469087
The last one is especially based.

>>17469147
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contrarian

>>17469008
Ride the Tiger is apolitical and advocates being apolitical. It's really more of an assessment of modern life, its nihilism, and how to exist within it while having the sole intention of transcendence.
Revolt is political in the sense that it examines the esoteric origins of society and tackles concepts such as sacral kingship and societies based on metaphysically transcendental states and our subsequent degeneration from them in cycles.

>>17469170
>wikipedia

Chudius Evola

>>17469087

>>Criticized Mussolini

Did he?

>when this could mean certain death

I'm not sure about this: it was definitely not something you could easily get away with, but you weren't automatically execute either.

For instance, he himself declared that Sbardellotto and Schirru (two anarchists who literally tried to killed him), he would have pardoned, because they were brave and believed in an idea. Fact is, they refused to sign the pardon request.

>>17469037
Opportunity
Confidence
Good looks

Ill tell you something about bitches (and life in general): the closer you are to the source, the higher your property value

>>17469205

>he himself declared

he being Mussolini here, sorry, I forgot to type

>>17469207
what the fuck does this mean??????????????????????????????

>>17469324
Means he's too young to post here

bump

>>17469324
i think he's saying he fucks his mom

>>17467608
I liked mystery of the grail alot

>>17467623
to be a lovely wife and mother of white children

>>17469601
Based

>>17467623
>>17467608
>>17469601
>>17469632
that's a man fyi

>>17469643
Unlike you.

>>17469643

I wish, but nope

>>17468949
Do people see Blavatsky as anything but a con artist?

>>17469895
She was, and so are most people in occultism. It's a purposefully labyrinthine subject full of tricksters and frauds.

>>17468858
>>most notably - the Buddhists
>only where they align with tantra
Have you even read the Doctrine of Awakening?
>>Hermetics, Neoplatonists
>correct, but not eastern
The original Hermetists and Neoplatonists lived in Egypt and had obvious Eastern influences.
> "..defining karma.., which is completely different from what others believed it was".
You need to read his other books. Ride the Tiger isn't a systematic exposition on Eastern concepts. He is justified in not expanding on it in that particular book, because it's totally outside the scope of it. Honestly, I don't know why anything thinks starting with Ride the Tiger is ideal for getting to know Evola. People always seem to come out confused about what they just read, because they were expecting something other than analysis and instruction manual.

Look, you need to read more of him before you give your views on him. Ride the Tiger is not ideal introductory material.

>>17469037
Work out, make money, be confident, dress well, and b urself.

>>17469037
read evola

>>17470265
>technology itself is degenerate
someone didn't read him

>>17470370
You can already tell from the emphasis put on Islam when, while Evola was not hostile to it, he was also not in favour of publicly wanking over.

Aren't both buddihists and stoics, basically religions of cope? I have a hard time going into Evola when it seems like theologically most of his work maybe on fundumentally perverted foundations.