/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.17399748]

HOLY SHIT.

[Anonymous No.17399753]

>>17399748
I KNOW IT'S AWFUL ISN'T IT

[Anonymous No.17399795]

>>17399753
I think the book is genuinely life-changing if you're mildly open minded.

[Anonymous No.17399939]

>>17399795
I was exaggerating as I don't think it's that bad, but it isn't great. I would much rather spend my time reading Heidegger or Bergson.

[Anonymous No.17399970]

>>17399748
His Calculus book is entertaining.

[Anonymous No.17399991]

>>17399939
What's wrong with it?

[Anonymous No.17400004]

get

[Anonymous No.17400091]

>>17400004
close but no cigar

[Anonymous No.17400095]

digits for jesus

[Anonymous No.17400100]

>>17400004
off the board

[Anonymous No.17400105]

>>17400100
roll

[Anonymous No.17400119]

>>17399970
its also 100% correct

[Anonymous No.17400126]

>>17399748
Guenon has some interesting insights, but in many ways he is utterly retard.

[Anonymous No.17400135]

>>17399939
heidegger fuckign SUX

[Anonymous No.17400139]

>>17400135
At least Heidegger can actually appreciate philosophy, and doesn't just say "waah wah Plato bores me" like Guenon.

[Anonymous No.17400155]

>>17400139
>pseuds actually think that Heidegger is even remotely comparable to Guenon

The value of Heidegger's ‘work’ mostly lies in what he stole from reading German translations of Zen and Taoist writings, once you strip these elements from his work it's left a series of hackneyed ambulations that one might expect from a stoned high schooler.

">May sees great influence of Taoism and Japanese scholars in Heidegger's work, although this influence is not acknowledged by the author. He asserts: "The investigation concludes that Heidegger’s work was significantly influenced by East Asian sources. It can be shown, moreover, that in particular instances Heidegger even appropriated wholesale and almost verbatim major ideas from the German translations of Daoist and Zen Buddhist classics. This clandestine textual appropriation of non-Western spirituality, the extent of which has gone undiscovered for so long, seems quite unparalleled, with far-reaching implications for our future interpretation of Heidegger’s work.""

Instead of reading hacks who did a poor and inferior rip-off of traditional doctrines as his own, you could instead read a brilliant polyglot who was esoterically initiated into multiple traditional doctrines and who explains them extremely well, i.e. a real intellectual, René Guénon (pbuh)

[Anonymous No.17400168]

>>17399753
look how hard he has to cope
fucking amazing

[Anonymous No.17400256]

>>17400155
>muh reductio ad absurdum
The same can be done for Guenon. Yet you didn't even answer my statement. Guenon was literally retarded when it came to Plato, and at least Heidegger thoroughly understood him and Western thought.

As for Heidegger's influence from the East, yeah no shit retard, everyone knows he was strongly influenced by Eastern thought, but he was also influenced by Schelling, and Aristotle, and an infinitude of others. And the reason Heidegger never mentioned the influence from the East is because, fundamentally, how radically different a thing he was doing was. The West can be helped and influenced by the East, but it can never overtake the difference between itself and the West. As well as that I'm sure Heidegger knew how much unnecessary distraction it would cause by studying all the words, and phrases and ideas in the East, in trying to compare, which would be only get away from his point and the East's.

You literally no absolutely nothing about Heidegger, an enormously complex thinker, yet just post something that sounds like it disproves him so you cannot that modern revisionist Guenon.

[Anonymous No.17400260]

>>17400256
have sex

[Anonymous No.17400267]

>>17400256
what no pussy does to a mf
>>17400260
this

[Anonymous No.17400285]

>>17400260
>>17400267
You're a modern like any other, and only bring yourself further away from anything traditional society and beliefs were like by so dogmatically following Guenon-- a modern man, raised in modern France, who think he can be a Sufi like any other if he lives in a desert with some other practisers. I'm gonna say it, following completely any Eastern religion is nihilistic and antithetical to true religion as a Westerner.

>For Heidegger, Being is persistently a question of the German (in the 1930's and early 1940's) and later European and Western confrontation with the history of Being from its Greek origins to modern technology. In relation to this unique Western history of Being, and its needed transformation through confronting that history, the Eastern is constructed as an ahistorical realm. Eastern ways of thinking and living are secondary and derivative to a historical transformation that can only be a Western self-transformation. Even though East Asian words and persons are mentioned more frequently than the Judaic, Islamic, or African in Heidegger's comments, the Eastern is separated and postponed to an indefinite future dialogue for which we are unprepared.
>Heidegger is concerned with how Eastern traditions supposedly deemphasize the privilege of the human -- as the guardian of the clearing and openness of Being -- and links the East with the irrational, mystic, and nihilistic.
>Whereas the West is world-historic, the East -- despite its long practice of writing history and its significance in Confucian thought -- is unlike the West in being fundamentally ahistorical. "Asia" and the "Asiatic" are identified with Soviet Russia in the 1930's, and associated with impersonal and barbaric multitudes. The rhetoric of the "Asiatic" indicates a radical alienness, fatalism, and threat. Ancient Greece, Germany in the 1930's, and the contemporary West must overcome the Asiatic by staying within themselves and returning to what is properly their own calling. Whereas Hegel argued that the Asiatic was sublimated into the Greek, Heidegger demands radical opposition and overcoming of its slavish fatalism and barbaric mythos.

[Anonymous No.17400295]

>>17400285
>Eastern thought is barbaric nihilism for the multitudes
Kek, based Heidegger.

[Anonymous No.17400298]

>>17400285
lol, imagine coping this hard because people pointed out that Martin was a hack

[Anonymous No.17400314]

>>17400298
>Guenon
>more important than Heidegger
What world do you live in?

[Anonymous No.17400322]

>>17400314
outside the reign of quantity

[Anonymous No.17400334]

>>17400322
Wrong, you live inside the reign of quantity and technology by your thorough supporting of a modern dogmatic revision of traditional metaphysics.

[Anonymous No.17400337]

>>17400314
>>Guenon
>>more important than Heidegger
Yes, unquestionably.

Rene Guenon is the most correct, smartest and most important person of the twentieth century. There was no smarter, deeper, clearer, absolute Guenon and probably could not be. It is no coincidence that the French traditionalist René Allé in one collection dedicated to R. Guenon compared Guenon with Marx. It would seem that there are completely different, opposite figures. Guenon is a conservative hyper-traditionalist. Marx is a revolutionary innovator, a radical overthrower of traditions. But Rene Halle rightly guessed the revolutionary message of each of Guenon's statements, the extreme, cruel noncomformity of his position, which turns everything and everything upside down, the radical nature of his thought. The fact is that René Guenon is the only author, the only thinker of the twentieth century, and maybe many, many centuries before that, who not only identified and confronted with each other secondary language paradigms, but also put into question the very essence of language (and metalanguage).

The language of Marxism was methodologically very interesting (especially at a certain historical stage), subtly reducing the historical existence of mankind to a clear and convincing formula for confronting labor and capital (which, in fact, was a colossal revolutionary and predictive course, because it allowed many things to be systematized and brought together into a single, more or less consistent, dynamic structure). Being a great paradigmatic success, Marxism was so popular and won the minds of the best intellectuals of the twentieth century. But R. Guenon is an even more fundamental generalization, an even more radical removal of masks, an even broader worldview contestation, putting everything into question.

- Aleksandr Dugin

[Anonymous No.17400351]

>>17400337
I like Dugin, but he's never said anything original at all. And this statement, though appreciable, is just an idle playing along into Guenon's own exact metaphysics.

[Anonymous No.17400365]

>>17400334
no
you won't get away by just calling everyone that doesn't confirm a larper
you outed your own LARP for the world to see

[Anonymous No.17400388]

>>17400365
>most influential and original thinker of the 20th century
>"nah bro it's not a LARP to believe I'm an ancient warrior-priest but you're just LARPing if you think Heidegger is important"
Keep seething.

[Anonymous No.17400420]

>>17400388
dilate

[Anonymous No.17400444]

Why is this board flooded with retards?

[Anonymous No.17400551]

>all traditions relate to the divine in their own way
>but Hinduism is the closest to it and the value of a tradition is measured by how close to Hinduism it is
Wow, really traditional Guenon!

[Anonymous No.17400574]

guenon is a safehaven for midwits who cant into real occultism

the man himself was alright though

[Anonymous No.17400578]

>>17400551
Ask me how I know you've never read him

[Anonymous No.17400587]

>>17400256
>The same can be done for Guenon.
No. Guénon never affirmed he was doing philosophy and never relied on traditional metaphysics to sustain a supposed original philosophy/metaphysics/ontology.

>Guénon was literally retarded when it came to Plato
Agreed.

>at least Heidegger thoroughly understood him and Western thought.
I'm not sure about this and I genuinely ask you to prove your point here now. Are you implying Heidegger did not understand Eastern thought?

>Heidegger was influenced by...
Irrelevant.

[Anonymous No.17400724]

>>17400587
>No. Guénon never affirmed he was doing philosophy and never relied on traditional metaphysics to sustain a supposed original philosophy/metaphysics/ontology.
I meant reducing his system to insults and absurdity, can you not read?

Also Guenon literally relied on traditional metaphysics, how can you deny this?

>I'm not sure about this and I genuinely ask you to prove your point here now. Are you implying Heidegger did not understand Eastern thought?
I do not think that Heidegger was much of an authority on the East, even if he was partially influenced by it, and has made some interesting observations on it in its differences from the West.

The main thing that will probably show Heidegger's understanding of Western thought and Plato, is his understanding of Plato's Parmenides dialogue. Something the Neoplatonists quite obviously did not understand, and most further thinkers barely even touched upon.

>Irrelevant.
As irrelevant as you saying that he ripped of the East, then. The point was that it was ridiculous to say he "ripped off" the East because he was partially influenced by it.

[Anonymous No.17400729]

>>17400578
Not an argument.

[Anonymous No.17400744]

>>17400285
>following completely any Eastern religion is nihilistic
What a retard

[Anonymous No.17400771]

>>17400256
>Heidegger thoroughly understood him and Western thought.

[Anonymous No.17400778]

>>17400724
>I meant reducing his system to insults and absurdity
Whose system? Guénon's? Are you serious? Please be clerarer here, it's all rather ambiguous what you are referring to. But in Guénon's case, first, he has no system, as I said, he does not affirm to be doing anything original, and second, there are no insults nor absurdity in his works. Try to prove it in case you are really affirming it of Guénon.
>Guénon literally relied on traditional metaphysics
I said he never relied on traditional metaphysics.....''to sustain a supposed original philosophy/metaphysics/ontology''. Can you not read?

>Something the Neoplatonists quite obviously did not understand, and most further thinkers barely even touched upon.
I have seen this claim about how ''neo''platonists got only the first half of Parmenides transposed into the One. Isn't it obvious that the first half is the One in itself, apophatic state, and the second half the One in relation to Being and its emanations, kataphatic state?

>you saying that he ripped off the East.
I'm a different person.
>The point was that it was ridiculous to say he "ripped off" the East because he was partially influenced by it.
He did not ripped off only from the East but also from the West: traditional metaphysics in general. I wonder also what I have read abou Heidegger that he had a problem with Tradition in our times. He might have a pertinent point here but I wonder how one can do metaphysics (or try to) and reject the presence and pertinence of Tradition in human history. It's like denying religion because of our idiosyncratic epoch. Can you tell us about this?

[Anonymous No.17400820]

>>17399753
true

[Anonymous No.17400862]

>>17400771
I've read this before, I'm not saying his omniscient, but he did bring a new understanding of Plato the likes we have never seen before. Guenon one can't deny didn't understand Plato in even the minutest sense.

Also that pic might be a bit disingenuous, as it doesn't necessarily mean it is Plato's dialectic that he strictly does not understand, but a number of things about "Platonic thinking." That mentioning of the dialectic, says nothing about the actual ideas of Plato's dialectic.

Though I do agree Heidegger was too harsh on Plato, at other times almost in spite of his own ideas he was the opposite, in his lectures on Plato's Parmenides dialogue he says Aristotle only intercepted what Plato was doing.

[Anonymous No.17400961]

>>17400778
>Whose system? Guénon's? Are you serious? Please be clerarer here, it's all rather ambiguous what you are referring to. But in Guénon's case, first, he has no system, as I said, he does not affirm to be doing anything original, and second, there are no insults nor absurdity in his works. Try to prove it in case you are really affirming it of Guénon.
Obviously, he does have a system anon. His thought is not contradictory, I use the word in more casual language so I advise you to be less autistic about it. The original point being that you (or whoever that anon was) just disingenuously reduced Heidegger to an absurdity, saying that his philosophy was nothing but a ripoff of Eastern thought and everything else in his thought was useless. I say one can be just as disingenuous to Guenon, and make him sound absurd too when he is not.

>I said he never relied on traditional metaphysics.....''to sustain a supposed original philosophy/metaphysics/ontology''. Can you not read?
Yes, and I'm disagreeing with you. Are you incapable of understanding someone not agreeing with you? I'm asking you how you can deny that Guenon did indeed rely on traditional metaphysics. Did he not admire Aristotle and Aquinas?

>I have seen this claim about how ''neo''platonists got only the first half of Parmenides transposed into the One. Isn't it obvious that the first half is the One in itself, apophatic state, and the second half the One in relation to Being and its emanations, kataphatic state?
Only partially. Because there are three parts to the Parmenides, and the dialogue ends by completely transcending the question of the one and the many. It's not denying it, but it's not caught in it like the Neoplatonists are.

>"Let this therefore be said, and let us also say the following, as it seems appropriate. Whether or not there is a unity, the unity itself and the manifold otherness, both in relation to themselves as well as to each other—all this, in every way, both is and is not, appears [phainetai] and does not appear. —This is most true [alēthestata]."
- Final passage of the Parmenides

>I'm a different person.
Okay, I wasn't sure about that.

>He did not ripped off only from the East but also from the West: traditional metaphysics in general.
There's a difference between building upon and starting a new beginning, and ripping off anon.

>Can you tell us about this?
He didn't have a problem with tradition at all, on the very contrary it was his belief that modern technologism was eroding tradition and its religion and the like. He rather had a problem with the false definition of tradition, as if your historical age isn't of the upmost importance. I guess in the case of Guenon and the traditionalists, the problem isn't with their religious beliefs and practices, but what exactly they believed about them. As if their traditionalism isn't a modern phenomena, they believed all traditions as coming from an a-historical idea.

[Anonymous No.17401053]

>>17400961
>Obviously, he does have a system anon. His thought is not contradictory, I use the word in more casual language so I advise you to be less autistic about it.
So by system you simply mean a determined thought? In any case, this ''system'' is not his own, there were countless metaphysicians and mystics of yore who acknowledged the same fundamental characteristic of metaphysics in different cultural expressions, Ibn Arabi, for example.

>Are you incapable of understanding someone not agreeing with you?
No but you are clearly failing to grasp a simple sentence of mine. I didn't deny that Guenon relied on traditional metaphysics, this is absurd. What I denied was his relying on it....''IN ORDER TO SUSTAIN A SUPPOSED ORIGINAL PHILOSOPHY/ETC.''. How difficult it is to understand this sentence?

>Three parts to the Parmenides
Two concerning the One, which the critique of ''neo''platonists failing to understand the dialogue fall on.

>new beginning
This is the problem.

>As if their traditionalism isn't a modern phenomena.
It is a modern phenomenon to critique and correct modern phenomena (read: distortions, subversions, etc.)? I'd say it is impossible to escape from the reciprocity of one epoch's dialectics, which, each epoch begets its own opposite. There is nothing modernist in them, but they are the dialectical counterpart of modernity. In this way none can escape one's epoch.

>they believed all traditions as coming from an a-historical idea.
Absolutely false and dishonest of you to make such a claim. Retract it now, I demand it or our conversation is over. There is not a single traditionalist who claimed any thing close to that. On the contrary, Guénon repeatedly reiterates that all, ALL, traditions are particular expressions of one and same metaphysical reality. All traditions are culturally constrained and formally determined.

[Anonymous No.17401165]

>>17400551
Guenon never said that

[Anonymous No.17401279]

>>17399753
Lmao based

[Anonymous No.17401475]

>>17399748
"hOLy" (shit)