/lit/ - Literature

>>20184192
in a way lacan did.

Evola

>>20184192
No. Your own personal variety of spirituality, perhaps. But it is a rational universe with no gods

>>20184192
What do you mean by religion? If you mean some kind of spirituality, then the answer is Bataille.

>>20184192
Reconciling is for slaves

nietzsche did in Ecce Homo

>>20184192
What is it with these shitty threads trying to relate Nietzsche to religion when he shits on it in every single one of his works?

>>20184525
don't care, didn't ask + your white

karl jaspers

>>20184192
"A nation that still believes in itself holds fast to its own god. In him it does honour to the conditions which enable it to survive, to its virtues—it projects its joy in itself, its feeling of power, into a being to whom one may offer thanks. He who is rich will give of his riches; a proud people need a god to whom they can make sacrifices.... Religion, within these limits, is a form of gratitude. A man is grateful for his own existence: to that end he needs a god.—Such a god must be able to work both benefits and injuries; he must be able to play either friend or foe—he is wondered at for the good he does as well as for the evil he does. But the castration, against all nature, of such a god, making him a god of goodness alone, would be contrary to human inclination. Mankind has just as much need for an evil god as for a good god; it doesn’t have to thank mere tolerance and humanitarianism for its own existence.... What would be the value of a god who knew nothing of anger, revenge, envy, scorn, cunning, violence? who had perhaps never experienced the rapturous ardeurs of victory and of destruction? No one would understand such a god: why should any one want him?—True enough, when a nation is on the downward path, when it feels its belief in its own future, its hope of freedom slipping from it, when it begins to see submission as a first necessity and the virtues of submission as measures of self-preservation, then it must overhaul its god. He then becomes a hypocrite, timorous and demure; he counsels “peace of soul,” hate-no-more, leniency, “love” of friend and foe. He moralizes endlessly; he creeps into every private virtue; he becomes the god of every man; he becomes a private citizen, a cosmopolitan.... Formerly he represented a people, the strength of a people, everything aggressive and thirsty for power in the soul of a people; now he is simply the good god.... The truth is that there is no other alternative for gods: either they are the will to power—in which case they are national gods—or incapacity for power—in which case they have to be good...."

"The fact that the strong races of northern Europe did not repudiate this Christian god does little credit to their gift for religion—<...>—and since then they have not managed to create any more gods. Two thousand years have come and gone—and not a single new god! Instead, there still exists, and as if by some intrinsic right,—as if he were the ultimatum and maximum of the power to create gods, of the creator spiritus in mankind—this pitiful god of Christian monotono-theism! This hybrid image of decay, conjured up out of emptiness, contradiction and vain imagining, in which all the instincts of décadence, all the cowardices and wearinesses of the soul find their sanction!—"

i did

>>20184192
Nietzsche himself did it. He included religion as slave morality. This in no way means he thought slave morality ought to be 100% eradicated. You can't have a top without a bottom, after all.

>>20184192
Picrel made Christianity Dionysian before Neech was even born.

>>20184192
"The philosopher, the way we understand him, we free spirits, as the man of the most all-encompassing responsibility, who has the conscience for the collective development of human beings—this philosopher will help himself to religion for use in his work of cultivation and education, just as he will use contemporary political and economic conditions. The selective and cultivating influence <...> which can be practised with the help of religions is something multifaceted and different, according to the type of human beings who are put under its spell and protection. <...> That’s something the Brahmin, for example, understood: with the help of a religious organization they arrogated to themselves the power to appoint a king for the people, while they held themselves apart and outside, sensing that they were human beings with higher purposes, something beyond kingship. Meanwhile religion also provides instruction for some of the ruled and an opportunity to prepare themselves for ruling and ordering in the future, those slowly ascending classes and groups, that is, those in which, because of fortunate marriage traditions, the force and desire of the will, the will to rule oneself, is always rising:—to these people religion offers sufficient stimuli and temptations to travel the route to a higher spirituality, to test the feelings of great self-conquest, of silence and solitude:—asceticism and Puritanism are almost indispensable means for educating and ennobling people when a race wishes to become master of its origins from the rabble and works its way up towards future ruling power. Finally, for ordinary people, the vast majority, who are there to serve for common needs and are permitted to exist only to that extent, religion gives an invaluable modest satisfaction with their situation and type, all sorts of peace at heart, an ennoblement of obedience, one more source of joy and suffering with people like them, and something of a transfiguration and beautification of and a justification for the whole routine, the whole baseness, the whole half-animal poverty of their souls. Religion and the religious significance of life bring the brilliance of the sun onto such constantly troubled men and make it bearable for them to look at themselves."
Beyond Good and Evil #61

>>20184224
You have not read Nietzsche.

>>20184208
I see why you might think this.

Evola Didn't necessarily reconcile Nietzsche with religion, he more thought Nietzsche got 90% of the way there but didn't quite make it, as he refused to acknowledge metaphysical truths. Its precisely his lack of spirituality which Evola thought made Nietzsche ultimately fall short, and why many traditionalists rejected Nietzsche as a kind of decadent modern. So in a way it was the very fact that Nietzsche couldn't be reconciled with religion that Evola criticized him for.

>>20184224
>But it is a rational universe

Jesus you haven't read Nietzsche at all, nor any existentialist for that matter. The irrationality of the universe is one of the foundational concepts in existentialism. Go read Kant retard.

Only one creature could have. Only one creature did.

All modern European pagans did.

Yeah I’m a Nietzschean Taoist/Buddhist

Vimalakirti

Nietzsche is best reconciled in Tantrism (Shaivism, Shaktism, Vajrayana) where the will to power is best exemplified. To be able to train yourself to master the occult serpent power and acquire superhuman capabilities. To identify yourself with Shakti (fem. Power).

jbp

>>20184192
Unironically my mom. She loves this pollack and she loves christ

Rene Girard in "I see Satan fall like lightning.

>>20184192
No. Nietzsche and Marx sit at the insuperable end of a strand in Western thought which had as it’s premise (which it mistook for a conclusion) the denial of the supernatural.
Now, you can try to fulfill the human religious impulse without the supernatural, but what you get instead is totalitarian politics.

>>20185817
Thanks professor, very interesting.

>>20185396
How can religion be slave morality when the west was ruled by the catholic church for hundreds of years?

>>20186152
I was reading some reactionaries and scholastics which say Nietzsche is the conclusion of the philosophical project begun by Descartes

>>20186168
That’s definitely true, but it’s complicated. Everything you need to get to Marx and Nietzsche is, in some sense, already there in Descartes.
Del Noce thinks there’s a second line of thought that starts from Descartes, and travels through Malebranche, Pascal, Vico and Rosmini which represents the truest hope for a genuine revival of Catholic religion, precisely because it sets its sights beyond the Medieval ideal, and supersedes the categories of progress and reaction.

>>20184192
Yes Acéphale

>>20186152
>Now, you can try to fulfill the human religious impulse without the supernatural
Religion is:
1. Exploitation of group bonding mechanisms - https://aeon.co/ideas/why-the-community-that-sings-together-stays-together
2. The basic attitude of "Don't overthink it, just do it, motherfucker" - https://aeon.co/ideas/we-need-highly-formal-rituals-in-order-to-make-life-more-democratic
3. Common memes/myths

You could just as well go hunting a mammoth together, or something.

>>20186152
>it’s premise (which it mistook for a conclusion) the denial of the supernatural
Because when a magician pulls a coin out of your ear, he is clearly conjuring matter out of nothing. Why even doubt it?

>>20186495
for comparison

>>20184192
My own personal take:
Somewhere in Beyond Good and Evil he talks about the "I" being a synthetic judgement, ultimately a belief or in other words a superstition. I think his argument here isn't that we should stop believing in the existence of ourselves but that it is inescapably necessary to believe in things which cannot be verified absolutely in order for us to live. I've recently come up with an argument for the notion that identity necessarily originates interpersonally and that a person's sense of self cannot exist unless they have established relationships with other people. In short, the identity of any kind is necessarily defined by its function within its relationship to an extrinsic entity. A chair is a chair because people sit on it; a family member is such because of their relationship to the other family members. In order for a person to conceptualize themselves as an entity they must interact with others or else they cannot formulate a framework of values from which to self-evaluate. Belief in a God establishes a standard of identity that renders one's perception of themselves at least somewhat independent of the perspectives of others. Without belief in God identity technically dissolves because if a person attempts radical individualism in a true sense they technically attempt to presume that they are their own thing-in-itself which doesn't work as I've explained so they either become essentially psychopathic or they project their identity onto objects and people creating a false attachment that weakens the individual. The only way an individual can become fully empowered is if they accept a God. In my view this reconciles Nietzsche with religion because it satisfies Nietzsche's axiom that Good = that which increases power; if God is the most empowering thing you can believe in than God is the highest good and doubting his existence is bad.

>>20186778
>The only way an individual can become fully empowered is if they accept a God
>>20184540
>a proud people need a god to whom they can make sacrifices.... Religion, within these limits, is a form of gratitude. A man is grateful for his own existence: to that end he needs a god
>when a nation is on the downward path, ... then it must overhaul its god. He then becomes a hypocrite, timorous and demure

Kierkegaard
Lev Shestov

>>20186778
>than God is the highest good and doubting his existence is bad
"The thing that sets us apart is not that we are unable to find God, either in history, or in nature, or behind nature—but that we regard what has been honoured as God, not as “divine,” but as pitiable, as absurd, as injurious; not as a mere error, but as a crime against life.... We deny that God is God.... If any one were to show us this Christian God, we’d be still less inclined to believe in him"

>>20186839
>>20186874
He also said that Christ was a misunderstood free spirit who overcame all resentment and who's crucifixion was a testament to what he taught.

>>20186958
>He also said that Christ was a misunderstood free spirit
"Verily, too early died that Hebrew whom the preachers of slow death honour: and to many hath it proved a calamity that he died too early.
As yet had he known only tears, and the melancholy of the Hebrews, together with the hatred of the good and just—the Hebrew Jesus: then was he seized with the longing for death.
Had he but remained in the wilderness, and far from the good and just! Then, perhaps, would he have learned to live, and love the earth—and laughter also!
Believe it, my brethren! He died too early; he himself would have disavowed his doctrine had he attained to my age! Noble enough was he to disavow!
But he was still immature. Immaturely loveth the youth, and immaturely also hateth he man and earth. Confined and awkward are still his soul and the wings of his spirit."

>>20187039
I'm aware that Nietzsche criticizes Jesus my point is that you lose your identity if you don't believe in a collective bond between you and something besides yourself so you have to pick between identifying with a God, identifying with other people, or identifying sovereignly which I argue doesn't work. Nietzsche's idea of letting your will decide that the superman is the meaning of the earth is the same as accepting God as your primary source of identity.

>>20186161
"Master morality" does not mean "the morality of whoever happens to be in charge at the time". Nietzsche is a critic of his contemporaries. Obviously he thinks the liberal institutions that are seizing power in Europe exemplify slave morality. Whether something is master or slave morality has less to do with the current social status of the people who practice it, and more to do with where it originated, which psychological forces shaped it, and what symptoms it induces in people who adopt it.

>>20186452
>>20186495
>>20186500
Peak bugman

>>20186348
Thanks for the rec. I'll give it a read. I'm neither catholic nor Aristotelian, but those philosophers who are have really interesting insights to the development of philosophy post Descartes. I guess thats because the Cartesian project was begun with the intent to critique catholic philosophy. The dialectic continues.

>>20187122
>letting your will decide that the superman is the meaning of the earth is the same as accepting God as your primary source of identity.
In terms of Nietzsche, "God" in the Christian sense is kind of world denial. "The meaning of the earth" could only be equated with god in a pantheistic sense, which Christianity rejects

>>20184192
>Genealogy of Morals (warrior-priest schism)
>Laws of Manu
>Cesare Borgia as Pope
Yes

>>20186152
And Nietzsche was actually very sympathetic to left wing politics as well. Just look up 'Nietzsche on socialism'.

>>20187165
>what symptoms it induces in people who adopt it
But a master needs slaves. If a morality induces people to be slaves for the sake of their masters (the church for example) then that is inherently master like.

>>20184192
John Neville Figgis comes to mind

>>20187711
why don't you read the author and attempt to understand him on his own terms instead of defining said terms differently and then willfully misinterpreting him

>>20187764
this again...

You can’t reconcile nietzche because he just says, “everything that comes out of your head is gay and that brute force is the only thing that matters.” Which is based but there really isn’t anything to bring Nietzsche into the western canon better than, “here is a man who reeee’d and reeeee’d he did.”

>>20187711
>But a master needs slaves
"Master morality" is a morality of an ancient barbarous "blonde beast". Those are joyous and healthy, because they forget quickly, i.e. they are retarded as fuck.
"Slave morality" is a morality of enslaved peoples. Those became *smart* (you became an "interesting animal" only due to this), but resentful and therefore utterly mad.

"This, yea, this alone is Revenge itself: the Will’s antipathy to time, and its “It was.”
Verily, a great folly dwelleth in our Will; and it became a curse unto all humanity, that this folly acquired spirit!
The spirit of revenge: my friends, that hath hitherto been man’s best contemplation; and where there was suffering, it was claimed there was always penalty."

>>20184192
Plenty have.

>>20189537
Forgetting quickly is not stupidity, it is noble simplicity, the same concept Christians used to describe the God who did not contemplate a multitude of ideas or things (which would reduce God's perfection). Most of those "blonde beasts" (including the Japanese no less) he is speaking of would still be able to outwit you, in Genealogy he states that the masterful are "capable" of forgetting, which means it is willful forgetting and not accidental, because they're above grudges. This is why those same "strong ones", like the brahmins, were masters. It wasn't just brute force, which is a misreading and misunderstanding of the blonde beast. That was certainly one aspect of their existence though, or in the case of the Indians, the warrior caste.

>>20187820
It's there again because you didn't learn the previous time.

>>20190029
>Most of those "blonde beasts" (including the Japanese no less) he is speaking of would still be able to outwit you
"Species do not evolve towards perfection: the weak always prevail over the strong—simply because they are the majority, and because they are also the more crafty. Darwin forgot the intellect (—that is English!), the weak have more intellect. In order to acquire intellect, one must be in need of it."

>it is noble simplicity, the same concept Christians used to describe the God who did not contemplate a multitude of ideas
>This is why those same "strong ones", like the brahmins, were masters.
"Where life and knowledge seem to contradict each other, there was never any serious fight to begin with; denial and doubt were simply considered madness. Those exceptional thinkers, like the Eleatics, who still posited and clung to the opposites of the natural errors, believed in the possibility of also living this opposite: they invented the sage as the man of unchangeability, impersonality, universality of intuition, as one and all at the same time, with a special capacity for that inverted knowledge; they had the faith that their knowledge was at the same time the principle of lift. But in order to be able to claim all this, they had to deceive themselves <...> Gradually the human brain filled itself with such judgements and convictions; and ferment, struggle, and lust for power developed in this tangle. Not only utility and delight, but also every kind of drive took part in the fight about the 'truths'; the intellectual fight became an occupation, attraction, profession, duty, dignity - knowledge and the striving for the true finally took their place as a need among the other needs. Henceforth, not only faith and conviction, but also scrutiny, denial, suspicion, and contradiction were a power; all 'evil' instincts were subordinated to knowledge and put in its service and took on the lustre of the permitted, honoured, useful and finally the eye and the innocence of the good. Thus knowledge became a part of life and, as life, a continually growing power, until finally knowledge and the ancient basic errors struck against each other, both as life, both as power, both in the same person <...> the ultimate question about the condition of life is posed here, and the first attempt is made here to answer the question through experiment. To what extent can truth stand to be incorporated? - that is the question; that is the experiment."

bump

>>20189537
So african tribes were master morality until the europeans came and mucked it all up. Knew it!

>>20184208
>>20185817
This. If you like Nietzsche but also like metaphysics/spirituality and you haven't read Evola, what the fuck are you doing?

>>20184525
didn't he like Islam?

>>20184525
People like his ideas of master/slave morality and aristocracy but need a spiritual dimension to give them a purpose.

>>20186778
All this word salad to say god good, not believing in god bad, what a pseud.

>>20185830
Irrationality doesn't negate logic entirely, it just showcases the probabilities and uncertainties of absolute logic in every situation. It's stupid to believe logical positivism or empiricism is incompatible with existentialism. If anything they go hand in hand.

Although I believe religion is ultimately incompatible with existentialism though. And it's equally ignorant to believe judeo-christian values will magically solve everything, as if faith will resolve mathematical improbabilities or meaningless repetitions of life

>>20185830
Funny you say that. Irrationality doesn't negate logic entirely, it just showcases the probabilities and uncertainties of absolute logic. Sure, logic doesn't prevail in every situation because humans are largely illogical. But it's stupid to believe logical positivism/empiricism is incompatible with it. If anything they appear to be opposites at first, but then go hand in hand

>>20185817
I think you're forgetting what reconciliation actually means. You CAN reconcile Nietzsche with religion and I agree that Evola accomplished this.

Evola sat there pondering with Nietzsche in one hand and hermetic traditionalism in the other hand and very powerfully showed that these two can indeed exist together. The fact that Nietzsche himself did not believe in hermetic traditionalism is irrelevant.

>>20185855
why did nietzsche cry when a horse was being whipped?

>>20192725
>until the europeans came and mucked it all up
Pursuit of truth is incompatible with life. Gods died, because Socrates started asking questions.
"For us, the falsity of a judgment is still no objection to that judgment—that’s where our new way of speaking sounds perhaps most
strange."

>>20186778
>than God is the highest good and doubting his existence is bad.
Dionysus good, the Crucified One bad.

>>20184192
Hölderlin and Heidegger did

>>20184525
It shows that Nietzsche is missing something for most people. At this point one only really only appreciate Nietzsche fully if they already hated religion beforehand.

>>20195638
>one only really only appreciate Nietzsche fully if they already hated religion
Except that Nietzsche did not hate religion per se. Just the current one with its anti-life values.

"The Christian concept of a god—the god as the patron of the sick, the god as a spinner of cobwebs, the god as a spirit—is one of the most corrupt concepts that has ever been set up in the world: it probably touches low-water mark in the ebbing evolution of the god-type. God degenerated into the contradiction of life. Instead of being its transfiguration and eternal Yea! In him war is declared on life, on nature, on the will to live! God becomes the formula for every slander upon the “here and now,” and for every lie about the “beyond”! In him nothingness is deified, and the will to nothingness is made holy!..."


"Who created for themselves such caves and penitence-stairs? Was it not those who sought to conceal themselves, and were ashamed under the clear sky?
And only when the clear sky looketh again through ruined roofs, and down upon grass and red poppies on ruined walls—will I again turn my heart to the seats of this God."

"I like to lie here where the children play, beside the ruined wall, among thistles and red poppies."

"And just behold, my friends! Here where the tarantula’s den is, riseth aloft an ancient temple’s ruins—just behold it with enlightened eyes!
Verily, he who here towered aloft his thoughts in stone, knew as well as the wisest ones about the secret of life!
That there is struggle and inequality even in beauty, and war for power and supremacy: that doth he here teach us in the plainest parable."

"Better songs would they have to sing, for me to believe in their Saviour: more like saved ones would his disciples have to appear unto me!
Naked, would I like to see them: for beauty alone should preach penitence. But whom would that disguised affliction convince!"

"This counsel, however, do I counsel to kings and churches, and to all that is weak with age or virtue—let yourselves be o’erthrown! That ye may again come to life, and that virtue—may come to you!—”"

>>20184208
Stop this. Evola is not religious, he's a syncretist and occultist, ie "spiritual but not religious". It's easy to synthesize Nietzschean ethics with your own syncretic religious ideas.

>>20195777
>a syncretist and occultist, ie "spiritual but not religious"
Syncretism was/is a normal practice for Graeco-Roman pagans, for example. Those guys, who poisoned Socrates on the accusations of impiety.
Occultism started in Ancient/Hellenic Egypt, and, according to Agamben, was in essence misusing oath's to gods to enforce your will on reality.

>>20195540

>>20184192
not with cristianity

Why does the mentality exist that if you read/believe a philosopher, you have to support them 100%? It’s the thought process that counts

>>20190433
Striving for truth in more abstract metaphysical sense is just an offshoot of man striving for truth in hunting and more primitive forms. It is the most natural development possible. Nietzsche seems to want to de-evolve what is natural in man back into its most primitive form. Its really a poisonous kind of inverted romanticism that exalts primitiveness and irrationality as somehow superior and separate.

>>20196411
>Nietzsche seems to want to de-evolve
"Even measured by the standards of the ancient Greeks, our entire modern being, insofar as it is not weakness but power and consciousness of power, looks like sheer hubris and godlessness; for the very opposite of those things we honour today have for the longest period had conscience on their side and God to guard over them. Our entire attitude to nature today, our violation of nature, with the help of machines and the unimaginable inventiveness of our technicians and engineers, is hubris; <...> our attitude to ourselves is hubris—for we experiment with ourselves in a manner we would not permit with any animal and happily and inquisitively slit the souls of living bodies open. What do we still care about the “salvation” of the soul? We cure ourselves later. Being sick teaches us things—we don’t doubt that—it’s even more instructive than being healthy. The person who makes us ill appears to us nowadays to be more important even than any medical people and “saviours.” We violate ourselves now, no doubt about it, we nutcrackers of the soul, we questioning and questionable people, as if life were nothing else but cracking nuts. And in so doing, we must necessarily become every day constantly more questionable, more worthy of being questioned, and in the process perhaps also worthier—to live? All good things were once bad things; every original sin has become an original virtue"

"The man from an age of dissolution, which mixes the races all together, such a man has an inheritance of a multiple ancestry in his body, that is, conflicting and frequently not merely conflicting drives and standards of value which war among themselves and rarely give each other rest—such a man of late culture and disturbed lights will typically be a weaker man <...> . But if the opposition and war in such a nature work like one more charm or thrill in life—and bring along, in addition to this nature’s powerful and irreconcilable drives, also the real mastery and refinement in waging war with itself, and thus transmit and cultivate self-ruling and outwitting of the self, then arise those delightfully amazing and unimaginable people, those enigmatic men predestined for victory and temptation, whose most beautiful expressions are Alcibiades and Caesar (—in their company I’d like to place the first European, according to my taste, the Hohenstaufer Frederick II), and, among artists, perhaps Leonardo da Vinci. They appear precisely in the same ages when that weaker type, with its demands for quiet, steps into the foreground: both types belong with one another and arise from the same causes"

>>20196463
None of your quotes are really disagreeing or challenging the posters you have responded to. Posting quotes without elaboration is only interesting if we haven't already read the books, or they are obscure books which naturally few people have ever glimpsed.

>>20195576
>Pursuit of truth is incompatible with life
Oh shit The Jews knew all along.
Byebye paradise

>>20195777
That's where the constructive Evola reader comes in to fill that gap

>>20185904
Holy Nolans, Batman!

>>20197901
Alfred, I completed the system of German Idealism and GNU/Linux

Have you tried reading Nietzsche?

>>20184192
Friedell tries to paint the Übermensch as a Christian conception and calls Nietzsche the final and last deeply religious spirit of the Europeans.

>>20197903
For BatGod so loved the world...

>>20196411
>Nietzsche seems to want to de-evolve what is natural in man back into its most primitive form.
Nope. Read Human, All Too Human where he dedicates aphorisms near the beginning to explaining how this is a completely futile endeavor.

>>20184192
I saw someone posting a book about uniting socialism and Nietzsche. Which, if you take at face value, is retarded. So why not grift and do it with religion? If you don't, I'll do it.

>>20199612
Misinterpreting Nietzche is an age old past time. Go for it.

>>20186376
Yup

>>20184192
Take away the stache and he's just another angry germic gayboy mad at God

>>20197922
Have you tried eating shit? It's about the same.

>>20199797
You're not wrong

>>20198879
And then read Antichrist where he says it's a good idea. It's almost as though he purposely contradicts himself.

Vatican II

>>20184192
Evola

Kirkegaard

Nietzsche was religious, he just criticized aspects of it. The Last Man of today would literally be one of those "trust the science" athiests. The Ubermensch of today is an unvaxxed tradcath

>>20186168
Descartes project had its roots in Abelard and William of Ockham.

>>20200464
>Nietzsche was religious
>literally called himself 'the antichrist'

Once again, christian cope is tge most pathetic cope out there

>>20184192
Nietzsche had a Messiah complex but couldn't let himself embody it fully because he hated the Church and hated himself. If you read Thus Spake Zarathustra it's pretty self evident.

>>20200881
>>literally called himself 'the antichrist'
You don't have to be irreligious, if you worship Dionysus.

I've started reading some N as of late, why do people hardly mention how beautifully he writes? He's a goddamn poet.

>>20184204
Explain.

>>20199834
He never says it's a good idea.

>>20195395
If belief in God ultimately provides a person with more power than atheism then God is good. The fact of Christianity becoming counter-cultural is a testament to this reality. Zoomers judge things on a very primitive basis; they will see something and judge it on pure intuition, based or cringe. As Nietzsche said, dialectics are a last resort for anyone who can't convince people rhetorically, aka by being likable. Pretty much everything popular to teenagers on social media right now is decided by female hypergamy. Christianity will become the dominant cultural force once Christian men become noticeably more attractive to women than atheists as a trend.