3x3 thread

[Anonymous No.13266996]

[Anonymous No.13267037]

>>13266996

[Anonymous No.13267071]

>>13267037
Where to start with Tomberg (in English)?

[Anonymous No.13267103]

>>13267071

Sorry to say his books get no easier than Meditations on the Tarot. He expects his reader to have a basic understanding of metaphysics, and I always recommend the Guenon collection for this.

[Anonymous No.13267150]

>>13267037
Other than Fr. SR, Dostoevsky, and Guenon, who are these people?

[Anonymous No.13267235]

>>13267150
>Rose, Dostoevsky, Tomberg
>Codreanu, Guenon, de Maistre
>Spengler, Schuon, D'Annunzio

[Anonymous No.13267576]

>>13266996
Based 3x3 as fuck

[Anonymous No.13267583]

[Anonymous No.13267592]

>>13266996
Dualism is absolute !

Picture books and children's literature are of Ohrmazd's light !
Horror literature is of Ahriman's decadent darkness !

Zarathustra pointed to Ohrmazd.
Derrida is pointed to Ahriman. Derrida is now in hell.

I am the Saoshyant and am in the Middle.

[Anonymous No.13267617]

[Anonymous No.13267630]

>>13267617
Based

[Anonymous No.13267638]

>>13267617
Both Nietzsche and Derrida are in hell for trying to delegitimize dualism.

[Anonymous No.13267645]

>>13267592
After thinking more, change Derrida to Nietzsche. Nietzsche's Transvaluation of Values is what popularized the whole trend of rejecting the reality of moral dualism.

[Anonymous No.13267652]

>>13267638
>being a dualist
Cringe

[Anonymous No.13267660]

>>13267652
>being a nondualist
Have fun in hell, daeva.

[Anonymous No.13267666]

>>13267660
>hell
yikes

[Anonymous No.13267669]

>>13267666
Those are fitting trips, deva. Even early Buddhism and Hinduism have a hell, and you're going there, edgelord faggot.

[Anonymous No.13267672]

>>13267592
Based dualist zoroaster poster

[Anonymous No.13267673]

[Anonymous No.13267688]

>>13267669
>even early Buddhism and Hinduism have a hell
so? all theists are wrong.
have fun wasting your life by choosing to believe in any form of religion over the real life. grow up, seriously.

[Anonymous No.13267699]

>>13267688
>all theists are wrong.
Early Buddhism was not necessarily theistic. It just had lower hells (rigpas) and high formless realms based on the karma accrued in this lifetime.
>have fun wasting your life by choosing to believe in any form of religion over the real life
Have fun being an immoral douchebag by believing in no objective ethics. Wake up.

[Anonymous No.13267725]

>>13267699
>objective ethics
How can anyone belive in this bullshit?

[Anonymous No.13267753]

>>13267725
By looking into your utter depravity and then taking some time alone and feeling the frail divine inner light? You are like a vacuum of all meaning, daeva. Having the misfortune of encountering you is like being sucked into a vortex of hell. Any respite from dealing with you would thus reveal a viable basis of meta-ethics and normative ethics.

[Anonymous No.13267765]

>>13267592
After more thinking, change Kevin Henkes to Sven Nordqvist.

[Anonymous No.13267781]

>>13267753
>vacuum of all meaning
in contrast to you, my life actually has meaning. you on the other side chose to believe in something that doesnt exist: a god. its sad to see how you waste your life by believing in something non-existing.

>utter depravity
>misfortune of encountering you
>being sucked into a vortex of hell
it's nice to see how you are refusing to actually answer my question and siding with insults and emotion. butthurt?

[Anonymous No.13267791]

>>13267781
You are a naive realist. You think reality is reducible to physical constituents, but that is equally as unfalsifiable as other metaphysical positions. I can spend time giving you my nuanced, complex metaphysics and arguments.

My approach is called "Rudimentary Dualism", and I think it can help the modern world's predicament in the sense antinomian tendencies have become widespread. I define Rudimentary Dualism as an established basic dichotomy between "good" and "evil", and one privileges "good" over "evil" for certain soteriological end goals or what have you. The issue is that naturalism and physicalism do not allow for Rudimentary Dualism due to the absence of a telos, so the goal of my movement is to point out all the flaws in the modern physicalist worldview in order to offer justifications to be "good" based on equally plausible soteriological schemes.

It has become common in this time-period to say good and evil are relative or arbitrary. To many nihilists, even a picture book of dismembering or disemboweling someone can be considered "good". I take issue with this because 1) we do not know if eternal oblivion truly awaits us after death -- there could be more complex soteriology 2) the qualia associated with good and evil have essential distinction and one cannot create a 'good' picture book of dismemberment since it becomes horror. There is no blurry line between good and evil, and I take issue with some Zen Buddhists and Advaitan Hindus who try to deconstruct good and evil; even the Buddha argued that enlightenment is only possible through the three antidotes of generosity, loving-kindness, and wisdom. However, many later Buddhists tried to blur the antidotes with the poisons such as greed, hatred, and delusion, so in their worldview, an enlightened serial killers who murders without a sense of self is possible.

I believe Derrida was a very evil man, and my philosophical approach is a more honest assessment of his views in order to make it better. Good and evil are not indeterminate and there are no undecidables when we establish some viable cause in any kind of soteriology (e.g., rebirth, heaven/hell, inward involution of dreams, etc.) Rudimentary Dualism is not the same as Ontological Dualism, but it is more of an acknowledgment that there is some very Rudimentary Dualism in all meta-ethics and normative ethics when we take it very sincerely and try to consider all metaphysical possibilities.

[Anonymous No.13267809]

>>13267781
I do not necessarily believe or not believe in a god*. I just believe there is a viable metaphysical basis for a Rudimentary Dualism, that's it.

[Anonymous No.13267826]

>>13267791
nice copy paste, faggot

>You think reality is reducible to physical constituents
yes, it is.
>starts talking about "good" and "evil"
sorry, but i am beyond good and evil and nothing can make me belive in this absurd religious concept.

[Anonymous No.13267827]

>>13266996
who are these people

[Anonymous No.13267835]

>>13267037
>>13266996
dont recognize half of them, i only see guenon and plotinus, who are they

[Anonymous No.13267840]

>>13267827
Plato, Shankara, Sanai, Plotinus, Guenon, LaoTzu, Homer, Dostoevsky, Cervantes
see OP's file name

[Anonymous No.13267841]

>>13267826
>ignores my entire post
Science does not prove reality is reducible to physical properties. Look up "Hard Problem of Consciousness". Even materialist answers are unfalsifiable. Read a real philosophy book and learn nuance.
>i am beyond good and evil
You truly aren't. You are icchantika filth and deserve to suffer for trillions upon trillions of kalpas. You are evil, plain and simple.
>nothing can make me belive in this absurd religious concept.
Then why ask me to explain? Go to hell.

[Anonymous No.13267842]

>>13267673
whos the 2nd

[Anonymous No.13267848]

>>13267660
If Zoroastrianism was true they wouldn't have been obliterated by Muslim Arabs, Hinduism is the only Hyperborean Aryan tradition that survived to any serious degree

[Anonymous No.13267862]

>>13267848
Nope, I am the Saoshyant and come forth with the greatest of Aryan renovations with my idea of "Rudimentary Dualism", which I plan to expand on further in the future. A picture book and horror story cannot become one without either side losing its essence. Only through the light can one reach enlightenment. There is no such thing as a darkly enlightenment.

[Anonymous No.13267875]

>>13267842
Janice Griffith

[Anonymous No.13267880]

>>13267841
>ignores my entire post
ignoring your shitty copy paste
>deserve to suffer for trillions upon trillions of kalpas. You are evil, plain and simple
are sure that i am the "evil" one?
why is it always so that theists wish me death when disagree with them but they are the nice ones and i am evil? kek
>Then why ask me to explain?
theoratially, i would change my opinion if you would convince me. but practiaclly, thats just not going to happen
>Science does not prove reality is reducible to physical properties
so?

[Anonymous No.13267893]

>>13267235

The last is actually Russian philosopher Ivan Ilyin

[Anonymous No.13267895]

>>13267848
Zoroastrians still exist in the hundreds of thousands, hindus also got conquered by muslims so this divine providence argument you got going on isn't that impressive.

[Anonymous No.13267896]

>>13267880
>ignoring your shitty copy paste
I can't always bother typing up an explanation of my views, so I copy-paste what I have written previously.
>are sure that i am the "evil" one?
There is no justification for good or evil in a purely physical, naturalist worldview. Ethical naturalism is flawed due to Humean is-ought gap.
>why is it always so that theists wish me death when disagree with them but they are the nice ones and i am evil?
I am not a theist, but I am just saying it is more likely you will go to hell or have a lower rebirth because you promote nihilism and antinomianism.
>theoratially, i would change my opinion if you would convince me
Because you don't read what I wrote.
>so?
Then why do you believe reality is reducible to physical properties? Look up issues with qualia and Hard Problem of Consciousness.

[Anonymous No.13267920]

>>13267896
>you promote nihilism
wrong
>Then why do you believe reality is reducible to physical properties?
because its only logical

[Anonymous No.13267921]

>>13267875
did she write anything good or do you just like her porn?
>>13267862
The Hindu scriptures identify enlightenment and God with light you dummy

[Anonymous No.13267941]

>>13267896
>due to Humean is-ought gap.
due to naturalistic fallacy* or sometimes appeal* to nature. Point is, you need something more than just physicalism/naturalism to base an ethics on.
>>13267920
Read a book on the Hard Problem of Consciousness. Raw, phenomenal experience =/= neural activity, even if it may depend on it. Also, physicalism/naturalism logically entail nihilism.
>>13267921
I don't have a problem with Hinduism when bad and good karma are acknowledged as having strict irreconcilable division.

[Anonymous No.13267946]

>>13267895
It's a nearly dead religion, it will never regain its former status and will always be a tiny tiny tiny fringe of the worlds population. People who want to join a dualistic religion just join the Abrahamic ones and it will always be that way. There is a reason Zoroastrianism is basically dead. The Muslims never controlled all of India and their rule was temporary, now there is a billion or so Hindus in control of their own massive country and they aren't going anywhere.

[Anonymous No.13267948]

>>13266996
This chart may be a mess but at least I made it in accordance with my innermost desire for greatness and of my own will and I became a tiny little bit more of a fulfilled, and mature person making it. Little things like this are why I adore life for what it is.

[Anonymous No.13267954]

[Anonymous No.13267970]

>>13267946
I have my own philosophy of life inspired by Zarathustra's Gathas, and my list was largely based on my philosophy. I went ahead and updated my list. I won't repost it again. I only read children's literature and horror stories. Everything else is a waste of time. Good and evil are absolute. It doesn't matter if it's good vs bad karma, good vs bad deeds, etc. Good and evil is absolute and anyone who disagrees will go to hell.

[Anonymous No.13267975]

>>13267970
>is absolute
are absolute*

[Anonymous No.13268002]

>>13267946
I'm not arguing against Christianity like the other poster, altho mazdayasna does give better answers when it comes to a few things such as good and evil I think.

> tiny fringe
People are still reading and learning from their texts, and will continue to do so, it's beautiful. Interestingly enough zoroastrians are probably more active in my western country than hindus.

[Anonymous No.13268004]

>>13267941
Idk about Zen but traditional Advaita doesn't try to deconstruct good and evil, they just say that the Absolute itself is beyond such distinctions but they still regard Brahman as being the highest good conventionally speaking and believe that moral behavior and justice etc is still important for practical reasons with regard to the world of manifestation that we live in and that this is in alignment with the Dharma that issues from the Absolute. It's not that different really from the Zoros considering that Zurvan is the source of dualities but is beyond them in the sense of not being characterized by or subject to them.

[Anonymous No.13268020]

>>13268004
meant to reply to >>13267791

[Anonymous No.13268039]

>>13268004
The problem with Zurvanism is that it deconstructs both good and evil, which is why Kartir Hangirpe persecuted them. I disagree with the persecution of the Manichees and Mazdakites, but there was valid reason to dislike the Zurvanites. They were antinomianists that viewed the border between good and evil as illusory.

If you believe righteous and compassionate behavior are more aligned with Brahman over evil actions, then I have no issue with you. However, if you say Brahman makes no distinction between good or bad and encompasses both as equally valid, then we have issues.

[Anonymous No.13268057]

>>13267954
bottom right ?
>>13267970
why are you a zorastrian

[Anonymous No.13268065]

>>13267235
(You) here

If I like the guys I recognised will I like the others?

[Anonymous No.13268074]

>>13268057
I write both horror fiction and children's stories with the goal to tacitly apprehend the relational natures of Ahriman and Ohrmazd. One of my horror stories has already been published. I am a reincarnation of Zarathustra, and I am the Saoshyant. Currently, I am looking for a literary agent for several picture book manuscripts I have finished.

[Anonymous No.13268085]

>>13268074
you didn't answer my question. why are you zoroastrian? im not looking up any terms. explain simply

[Anonymous No.13268087]

>>13268039
>If you believe righteous and compassionate behavior are more aligned with Brahman over evil actions, then I have no issue with you.
This is the official position of the vast majority of Hindu sects/schools including Advaita.

[Anonymous No.13268095]

>>13268085
I just did answer your question. I write both picture books and horror stories. One of my horror stories has already been published. I immerse my mind into both extremely serene and horrifying artwork in order to tacitly apprehend the duality of Spenta and Angra Mainyu.

[Anonymous No.13268134]

>>13268087
Well, then, I respect you. However, some later Zen Buddhists like Huang Bo do not imply that. They believe both good and bad have an indeterminate border, and someone even in the act of murderous rampage can become enlightened if he or she pacifies the mind and lets go of both good and bad karma. The Japanese during WWII utilized such philosophy to make more effective killers.

Frankist-Sabatteans have also infiltrated Western academia in order to promote antinomianism. They believe good can be viewed as evil, evil can be viewed as good. Good is evil, evil is good. This is what they believe. They believe a picture book that promotes compassion can be evil and a slasher story which promotes hatred can be good. There is nothing more evil than this perspective.

[Anonymous No.13268154]

>>13268057
Herman Hollerith

[Anonymous No.13268223]

>>13267841
>You are icchantika filth
nice right speech, Mr. "we need Buddhist terrorism" resident shitposter from /his/

[Anonymous No.13268239]

>>13268223
We need to eradicate Islam through any means necessary. Also, anyone who denies Rudimentary Dualism is obviously sick. They believe a picture book that promotes compassion can be evil and a slasher story which promotes hatred can be good. They argue good can be evil, evil can be good.

[Anonymous No.13268368]

>>13267103
omfg Guenon fag is back

[Anonymous No.13268899]

>>13267893
No kidding. Striking resemblance.

>>13268065
Some of them have quite a bit of overlap particularly the perrenialists/mystics Guenon, Schuon, and Tomberg. There's also a big Orthodox Christian contingent there but from different viewpoints. De Maistre stands out from the rest but he's one of my favorites and a great proponent of monarchy.

[Anonymous No.13269150]

>>13267921
Her collected tweets are very important.

[Anonymous No.13269244]

>>13269150
do you have any specific examples?

[Anonymous No.13269438]

>>13266996

[Anonymous No.13269453]

>>13267037
ebin orthozoomer
>>13267583
ebin edgy frenchman
>>13267592
ebin schizo
>>13267954
ebin stem sperg

[Anonymous No.13269462]

I've been on 4chan for 15 years and I don't truly get this meme.

[Anonymous No.13269600]

>>13267948

>The insidiousness of Jordan Peterson is that he simultaneously reduces timeless wisdom to self-help jargon and common sense advice while also affirming the righteousness and desirability of modernity. All of the problems that Peterson tackles are themselves just various manifestations of modernity itself, but nothing he talks or writes delves into this larger problem itself or how to deal with it. To the contrary, he takes religious texts that contain profound wisdom and teachings passed down through the ages and uses them as corporate bug-man self-help advice for kids who weren't raised properly. Peterson low-key pushes a mythos that western society in modernity is fundamentally just and a good thing and that aside from some irrational, stupid and greedy people that you have to deal with that everything is okay in principle.

>This couldn't be more wrong. Since the emergence of civilization most of the them were united by religious traditions teaching metaphysical knowledge. All the problems of the western mentality and society stem from the loss of this. Christ, the Neoplatonists and to some extent the Hermetics and certain Greek mystery cults all had it too but the Church eventually became an encrusted coffin of doctrine with no accompanying realizations to be had hence why it failed to prevent modernity from arising in the west. Without being connected to any higher understanding in any significant amount among it's intellectual elite, western society has ever since the renaissance has in free fall accompanied by materialism, nihilism, scientism and various other forms of spiritual and cultural degeneration. Peterson affirms all this as good by buying into the faulty idea of the linear progression of civilization and humanity and by shilling it to his unaware fans.

>Did you ever figure out why Peterson never seriously delves into eastern thought aside from a few boomer references to Buddhism and Confucius? It's because it totally destroys his worldview and offers completely different solutions to the ideas he address. Why did one of the largest and most impressive bodies of spiritual literature ever emerge out of society with a caste system? Because they are the right way to base a society. Most of the societal problems he address wouldn't even arise in a traditional eastern civilization pre-modernity but just reflect the state of the modern west. It's bad enough that he does all of this already but then he takes one of the few sources of timeless wisdom that are tradition in the west and reduces it to a source of bland common-sense life advice instead of a window to transcendental truths where all problems are resolved.

...

[Anonymous No.13269645]

>>13267617
Fixed

[Anonymous No.13270813]

>>13266996

[Anonymous No.13270986]

>>13267592
>I am the Saoshyant
Oh that's a fun RP I expect more

[Anonymous No.13270995]

>>13267753
>misfortune
>encountering
>respite
>would thus reveal
Dang, you got so irritated that you started writing all goofy

[Anonymous No.13271007]

>>13267841
>You are icchantika filth and deserve to suffer for trillions upon trillions of kalpas.
A) pretty pathetic to get that angry On The Line
B) By making that judgement, you are likewise deserving
C) Your dualism is far more sectarian, and thereby falsely reductive, than you're making it out to be. Stop RPing if it gets you this mad, man.

[Anonymous No.13271204]

>>13267037
Seraphim Rose, Dosto, Tomberg, Codreanu, Guenon, de Maistre, Spengler, Schuon, ?

>>13269438
Kiek, Blake, Dosto, Witty, George Herbert?, ?, Augustine, Shakespere, ?

Who are those guys?

[Anonymous No.13271207]

>>13271204
bottom right is baudelaire

[Anonymous No.13271253]

>>13271204
for the 2nd: Pascal, Shestov, and Baudelaire as already said

[Anonymous No.13271582]

Don't read much, but these are my favorite ones thus far.