/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.19279557]

Which books will definitively free me from the remnants of my christian upbringing's influence on my mind and worldview?
This isn't a meme or bait thread, I'm asking for books that will shift my perspective enough to allow me to completely let go of all the bullshit, as some of you might know it's hard to genuinely free yourself from something you've been raised in. I'm especially thinking about the aversion to any kind of self-exploration and inquiry that isn't strictly confined to what the church deems acceptable (otherwise it's satanic, etc)

[࿇ C Œ M G E N V S ࿇ !KNDY/Ar.iI No.19279609]

IT SEEMS LIKE YOU WANT TO FREE YOURSELF FROM «PROTESTANTISM», RATHER THAN FROM CHRISTIANITY; CHRISTIANITY IS THE ONLY WAY TOWARD FREEDOM FROM THE PERPETUAL ENEMY’S BONDAGE.

INDIVIDUALS LIKE YOU ARE LIVING TESTAMENT TO HOW «PROTESTANTISM» MISLEADS PERSONS AWAY FROM THE CHURCH, WITH ITS KRYPTOSATANISTIC WARPING OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE.

[Anonymous No.19279619]

>>19279609
Didn't read.

[࿇ C Œ M G E N V S ࿇ !KNDY/Ar.iI No.19279624]

>>19279619


IDIOT.

[Anonymous No.19279625]

>>19279557
Unironically read Guenon.

[Anonymous No.19279637]

>>19279625
I have, him and Evola a couple years ago, but I don't care for traditionalism. I don't want to free myself from a religion's dogma just to dive into another, if that makes sense.

[Anonymous No.19279655]

It's hard to know what to recommend based on what you've said. What of philosophy have you read?

[Anonymous No.19279664]

[Anonymous No.19279675]

>>19279655
Not too much in terms of serious philosophy aside from Plato and the romans (stoics and skeptics), I've mostly read about religion. The new testament, a lot of esoteric stuff that I don't believe in, some eastern texts, the traditionalists.
I'm more easily swayed by arguments that appeal to intuition and emotion rather than by dry rational expositions (which I think is why I got filtered by Aristotle)

[Anonymous No.19279680]

>>19279664
Does this defend physicalism?

[Anonymous No.19279682]

The holy quran

[Anonymous No.19279685]

>>19279682
>>19279637

[Anonymous No.19279830]

>>19279675
I think it's good to be acquainted with those things, since even people extensively and intensively familiar with philosophy will not be, and are thus often blinkered in their own way. I can't directly relate to the christian upbringing but in a sense real self-exploration and inquiry is painful for everyone, though not in an unnatural way.

I doubt if you can definitively free yourself from the influence of your upbringing. But that would be a negative result, a brainwashing or erasure, not being persuaded, not engaging in dialectic. I think this desire you have, and not being easily convinced, are much more than many people have. Rational expositions that don't reach any intuition are failures. Not just this or that "intuition" in the way analytics use the term uncritically and undialectically. The faculty of intuition. The "intuitions" or views need to be pitted against each other, and the process resembles war. Plato does this, the Buddha does this, others do it. Christians do it. Aleister Crowley does it. Ironically, many professional philosophers do not. Leo Strauss did this and in a way that addresses our post-20th century situation quite clearly. His student, but not follower, Stanley Rosen is one of the last to have done this very well. There is a great variety here that does not exclude meditation, ritual, prayer, magic and politics. There is no excuse for either sitting on your ass (mindlessly) or wallowing in nihilism.

[Anonymous No.19279949]

>>19279830
It's good but it hasn't been very useful to me on a personal level. I can talk for hours about western esotericism and eastern mysticism, and it's an interesting subject, but it's not something that I've felt had an impact on my life past the level of intellectual curiosity.
I don't want to erase my upbringing, I don't consider freeing yourself from the ridiculousness of seeing all other possibilities as demonic to be brainwashing either. Quite the opposite.
Does confronting intuitions really lead anywhere? Any ideology can have a claim to truth because as soon as you get into metaphysics, verifiability becomes irrelevant as empiricism doesn't apply anymore, and there is no objective answer to be reached, simply a personal preference. This is why dialectic appears to me as sterile insofar as it considers itself capable of apprehending truth.
>sitting on your ass (mindlessly) or wallowing in nihilism.
But I don't think the alternative is to engage in dialectic, do you?
I don't like taking this example because it's become a cliche and paints me as some kind of roganesque new ager, but the change in perspective encountered during a psychedelic or dissociative experience is direct perception that is "felt" and understood, not dialectical analysis. To me it seems superior because it doesn't constrain consciousness. I don't like the position that consists in reducing everything to the rationalizable and the cognized, when the vastness of the spectrum of perceivability so obviously dwarfs our entire rational framework.

[Anonymous No.19280087]

>>19279557
>>19279637

read philosophy then, philosophic deism is the natural evolution of spiritual and theological thought, from there you can choose to be more on the side of materialism with a basis on formal logic or idealism with a basis on hermeneutics
hegel, wittgensteing, and heidegger mogs each and every religious thinker from the past

[Anonymous No.19280149]

>>19279949
Why did you learn about them then?
Do you still consider other possibilities demonic? A christian who you might want to look into is David Bentley Hart.
I can only say where it has led me. Dialectic is inseparable from feeling and direct perception for me. Otherwise reason would be a mere external authority, and something fixed rather than a growing capacity for apprehending the true, the good and the beautiful to be developed along with the will, taste, etc. We have to be open to absolutely everything, psychedelic, dissociative experience, etc., and that openness, which is not merely passive, I call dialectical. It involves change, us being changed, changing ourselves, encountering the outside.
>diese Scheidung, diese Verdoppelung unserer selbst, dieser geheime Verkehr, in welchem zwei Wesen sind, ein fragendes und ein antwortendes, ein unwissendes, das aber Wissenschaft sucht, und ein wissendes, das aber sein Wissen nicht weiß, dieses stille Gespräch, diese innere Unterredungskunst, das eigentliche Geheimniß des Philosophen, ist es, von welcher die äußere, darum Dialektik genannt, das Nachbild, und wo sie zur bloßen Form geworden, der leere Schein und Schatten ist.
>This split, this doubling of ourself, this secret exchange in which are two beings, an asking and an answering, an unknowing which however seeks knowledge, and a knowing which however doesn't know its knowing, this quiet conversation, this inner art of persuasion, the actual secret of the philosopher it is, of which the outside, therefore called dialectic, is the impression, and where it has become mere form is the empty semblance and shadow.
—Schelling, die Weltalter

[Anonymous No.19280237]

>>19280087
I lean more towards idealism than materialism, I tried reading Heidegger but it was out of my depth.
>>19280149
>Why did you learn about them
I was looking for meaning in my life and first fell down the greenpill rabbit hole before going on to read more serious material.
I don't personally consider anything demonic consciously, but the thought comes back whenever I'm engaging with those subjects and brings doubt and fear.
>David Bentley Hart
I know him by name but haven't looked into his work, why do you recommend him?
I understand what you mean by dialectic but I think we just had differing definitions for the term, as rationality is subordinate to your "dialectical openness". I agree with your view on change and my personal experiences and investigations are leading me to realize the importance of change and dynamism.

[Anonymous No.19280969]

>>19279557
Just read history books. Read history on both Romans AND Sassanids.
Constantine obviously fabricated his vision of Jesus during a march to war with Sassanids. He wanted to use Nestorians as a fifth column against the Sassanids. It was also the first time referring to oppressed minorities as a pretext to intervention occurred. Roman-Sassanian wars were a lot more large scaled and bloody than Greek-Achaemenid wars. I would argue Roman-Sassanian wars were on the scale of world wars. It was technically the first world war in the history that culminated in changing the identities of respective regions; the effects are still apparent to this day unlike Greek-Achaemenid wars.
Most religions grow due to geopolitical reasons. By reading history, you will contextualize and demystify them in many respects.
Islam grew for geopolitical reasons too. Tbh, every single religion probably grew for geopolitical reasons... By understanding the historical contexts more, you will not be as enchanted when approaching their religious doctrines. You will be more keen to thinking for yourself and be a master over what influences you.

[Anonymous No.19280975]

>>19279557
Unironically this

[Anonymous No.19281017]

What the Buddha Taught and the Heart Sutra (use Red Pine's translation).

A World Full of Gods (by John Michael Greer).

Go watch Bryan Van Norden's youtube channel and whenever he admits to being a libtard just ignore it (yes, this is not a book, that is intentional).

Go watch this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEphouqTF9M, then this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEGJhJNesr8, then put "tao" into libgen and pick something you like; read it, then pick something else that's vaguely related to the first one. Keep repeating until you're immortal (you will need to continue this in your next life if you don't succeed the first time, however).

[Anonymous No.19281060]

>>19279557
Stirner

[Anonymous No.19281079]

>>19279557
Corpus Hermeticum and Prometheus Rising. Also the discordian texts in general

>>19279624
no you just rarely say anything of substance

[Anonymous No.19281097]

>>19279557
You can replace christian myth with any other one, progress or with some other religion for example. If you mean characteristics of christian faith, well you'll most likely never be free, since most worldviews/religions share characteristics.