/lit/ - Literature

Hating science is too extreme because hating science is not wroth it, because science is not really important on the historical scale. And if you want to debunk it you just need to analyse the claims of the scientists. For instance you have atheists who claim that immaterial math formulas they themselves invented run the material universe every millisecond across billions of light years, since 13 billions years ago.
Oh and by the way, when they are asked to say where do those immaterial formulas live and where they come from and how they act on matter, they can't fucking answer, can they?
If the universe is uncaused then why does it have physical laws that it must follow? Clearly those laws are actually imposed on the universe.


You know how atheists say a bunch of deformed illiterate inbreds rolling in shit, beating their children and women anthropomorphized Nature when they said gods were an amalgamation of the base fears of early humans. Well since the day a few atheist bugmen created computers, they are saying the universe is like their high-school calculators too, but bigger lol. That's their big brain idea and that's how dumb atheists are lol.

>>22456039
kek
oh, did la scienza alienate poor anon? sniff sniff
is maths too hard? i get it, it can be frustrating

>>22456069
Scientists make a mockery of mathematics

>>22456039
From The Artwork of the Future:

>From the moment when Man perceived the difference between himself and Nature, and thus commenced his own development as man, by breaking loose from the unconsciousness of natural animal life and passing over into conscious life, when he thus looked Nature in the face and from the first feelings of his dependence on her, thereby aroused, evolved the faculty of Thought, from that moment did Error begin, as the earliest utterance of consciousness.

>The path of Science lies from error to knowledge, from fancy ("Vorstellung") to reality, from Religion to Nature. In the beginning of Science, therefore, Man stands toward Life in the same relation as he stood towards the phenomena of Nature when he first commenced to part his life from hers. Science takes over the arbitrary concepts of the human brain, in their totality; while, by her side, Life follows in its totality the instinctive evolution of Necessity. Science thus bears the burden of the sins of Life, and expiates them by her own self−abrogation; she ends in her direct antithesis, in the knowledge of Nature, in the recognition of the unconscious, instinctive, and therefore real, inevitable, and physical. The character of Science is therefore finite: that of Life, unending; just as Error is of time, but Truth eternal. But that alone is true and living which is sentient, and hearkens to the terms of physicality (Sinnlichkeit). Error's crowning folly is the arrogance of Science in renouncing and contemning the world of sense (Sinnlichkeit); whereas the highest victory of Science is her self−accomplished crushing of this arrogance, in the acknowledgment of the teaching of the senses.

>The end of Science is the justifying of the Unconscious, the giving of self−consciousness to Life, the re−instatement of the Senses in their perceptive rights, the sinking of Caprice in the Want ("Wollen" ) of Necessity. Science is therefore the vehicle of Knowledge, her procedure mediate, her goal an intermediation; but Life is the great Ultimate, a law unto itself. As Science melts away into the recognition of the ultimate and self−determinate reality, of actual Life itself: so does this avowal win its frankest, most direct expression in Art, or rather in the Work of Art.

>The actual Art−work, i.e. its immediate physical portrayal, in the moment of its liveliest embodiment, is therefore the only true redemption of the artist; the uprootal of the final trace of busy, purposed choice; the confident determination of what was hitherto a mere imagining; the enfranchisement of thought in sense; the assuagement of the life−need in Life itself.

>The Art−work, thus conceived as an immediate vital act, is therewith the perfect reconcilement of Science with Life, the laurel−wreath which the vanquished, redeemed by her defeat, reaches in joyous homage to her acknowledged victor.

>>22456081
From Art and Revolution:

>Hand−in−hand with the dissolution of the Athenian State, marched the downfall of Tragedy. As the spirit of Community split itself along a thousand lines of egoistic cleavage, so was the great united work of Tragedy disintegrated into its individual factors. Above the ruins of tragic art was heard the cry of the mad laughter of Aristophanes, the maker of comedies; and, at the bitter end, every impulse of Art stood still before Philosophy, who read with gloomy mien her homilies upon the fleeting stay of human strength and beauty.

>To Philosophy and not to Art, belong the two thousand years which, since the decadence of Grecian Tragedy, have passed till our own day. In vain did Art send hither and thither her dazzling beams into the night of discontented thought, of mankind grovelling in its madness; they were but the cries, of pain or joy, of the units who had escaped from the desert of the multitude, and, like fortunate wanderers from distant lands, had reached the hidden, bubbling spring of pure Castalian waters, at which they slaked their thirsty lips but dared not reach the quickening draught unto the world. Or else it was, that Art entered on the service of one or other of those abstract ideas or even conventions which, now lighter and now more heavily, weighed down a suffering humanity and cast in fetters the freedom both of individuals and communities. But never more was she the free expression of a free community. Yet true Art is highest freedom, and only the highest freedom can bring her forth from out itself; no commandment, no ordinance, in short, no aim apart from Art, can call her to arise.

>The free Greek, who set himself upon the pinnacle of Nature, could procreate Art from very joy in manhood: the Christian, who impartially cast aside both Nature and himself; could only sacrifice to his God on the altar of renunciation; he durst not bring his actions or his work as offering, but believed that he must seek His favour by abstinence from all self−prompted venture. Art is the highest expression of activity of a race that has developed its physical beauty in unison with itself and Nature; and man must reap the highest joy from the world of sense, before he can mould therefrom the implements of his art; for from the world of sense alone, can he derive so much as the impulse to artistic creation. The Christian, on the contrary, if he fain would create an art−work that should correspond to his belief; must derive his impulse from the essence of abstract spirit (Geist), from the grace of God, and therein find his tools. What, then, could he take for aim? Surely not physical beauty, mirrored in his eyes as an incarnation of the devil? And how could pure spirit, at any time, give birth to a something that could be cognised by the senses?

>>22456080
They really don't, anon.

Klages so good! You read Cosmogonic Eros? Based af. Hmmm. I say thee: check out feyerabend and kuhn indeed. Heidegger prolly too. Also bourdieu and latour. Serres and Bachelard as well. Good book called technic and magic on subject too. Or just read other esotericists and skip science hate.

>>22456039
what of Klages did you read? Kuhn is good too but not antiscience. Rorty and Feyerabend are good too
this chart might help you

>>22456039
>claims to be an antiscience irrationalist
>writes the most dry and boring books trying to legitimize "graphology" and "characterology" as sciences
wdhmbt

>>22456039

Fitness beats truth

>>22456115
>Peirce
>anti-realist
wtf is this nigger smoking?

>>22456115
i'm apparently a metaphysical conservative according to this. not sure what that means or if the same as instrumentalism.

>>22456063
wtf

>>22456039
You read Klages wrong, dumbass. Try again

>>22456069
You would be killed in a fist fight, 100%. No matter how much you cope with sterile abstractions, this is Absolute.

>>22456063
fpbp

Klagesian critique of technological development is far more poignant then that autistic bugman tranny Kaczynski and pseud Heidegger.

>>22456039
>>22456063
>>22456069
>>22456080
>>22456081
>>22456091
>>22456104
>>22456110
>>22456104
>>22456110
>>22456115
>>22456369
>>22456650
>>22456658
>>22456659
>>22456695
>>22456725
>>22456733
>>22456755
>>22456772
>>22457058
If you hate Science, you implicitly hate the White race, and therefore it can be safely assumed that you are a blue-gummed pitch-black pygmy Congo bongo blackamoor, coprophagia too.
Simple as.

>>22457098
Keep posting more shirtless buff men, faggot.

>>22457098
Why the fuck did you mention me in your post, faggot? And why did you mention the other anon also calling OP a dumb N-slur for reading Klages like you would a homosexual like Ted and Heid.

>>22457110
Whites let niggers in their country then complain they hate niggers.

>>22457098
Whites being intelligent and innovative is actually a bad thing because they are not wise. Whites steer the current Zeitgeist but they have no idea wtf they're doing, they just want to strive, and everyone (including Whites) suffer for it.

>>22457120
>N-slur

>>22457138
Any books on Mutt's Law? Am*ricans can't stop thinking about BBC

>>22456755
>You would be killed in a fist fight
I am a well-groomed white man who lives amongst other civilized, gentle people. I can't remember the last occasion when I got close to getting into a fight. So no.

Oliver Heaviside

>>22457134
Jews control the zeitgeist, they aren't white you would have more of a point if you were considering historic times

>>22457122
Jews were the ones who imported them.

>>22456039
>what are some books that will affirm my beliefs further instead of challenging them

>>22457207
Jews are your sages. They are your modern day druids. This is precisely what I mean when I say your race is unwise.

>>22457166
The idea that whites are just inverse niggers (ie neurotic, conflict averse, image obsessed, obseqious) is genuinely more dangerous and subversive to the image of white people then depicting them as violent imperialist narcissists.

>>22457098
>I hecking love science and buff oiled men

>>22457307
Two of the things you said (neurotic, image obsessed) apply to a great portion of the nigger population

>>22457120
*nigger

>>22457239
Tell that to /sci/

>>22456039
>We lament the men who, properly desiring to wrestle at first hand with the problems that the great poets and philosophers have raised, yet contents himself with the “results” and “findings” of modern science.

Robert Maynard Hutchins

>>22457146
Why are you scared of typing a word?

>>22456039
Biocivilizations by Predrag B. Slijepčević. He argues life and mechanism are two different orders of logic. Life precludes mechanistic description. It's a relatively unknown but well-written book.

>>22456755
>You would be killed in a fist fight, 100%. No matter how much you cope with sterile abstractions, this is Absolute.

>>22457395
If you hate fighting then you're not a man. It's really that simple.

>>22457134
>Herp derp antisemitism amirite :D
Grow up.

>>22458413
Schizo

>>22458391
>>If you hate fighting then you're not a man. It's really that simple.
correction, if you hate fighting you're not beta cuck

science is a religion

>>22457745
This looks good