/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.19977036]

> NOOOO YOU CAN'T JUST STOP READING AFTER FULLY COMPREHENDING THE VOID
I can, and I will. Further discovery would be nothing but an exercise in -- verification. The self-effacement of action -- I can not be brothered to even waste more nothingness

[Anonymous No.19977047]

>>19977036
I like this man's face. It's Cioran, right?

[Anonymous No.19977069]

>>19977047
Not sure I just thought this guy was handsome

[Anonymous No.19977094]

>>19977047
yes

[Anonymous No.19977108]

>>19977036
Be a useless slug, then, OP. Go ahead. See if you make yourself and others proud that way. Alternatively, you could take this withered root's philosophy as an expression of the worst aspects of our nihilistic tendencies and use it to overcome your failings while making sure not to become fanatical about meaningless things. Up to you.

[Anonymous No.19977119]

>>19977036
>The Void
There is no such thing as the Void. The One is omnipresent. Void is only privation of the One, which you have never experienced. What you are experiencing is a lie.

[Anonymous No.19977131]

>>19977036
>I can not be brothered to even waste more nothingness
yet you made this worthless thread

[Anonymous No.19977180]

>>19977108
>Be a useless slug, then, OP. Go ahead.
Yes

[Anonymous No.19977332]

>>19977108
It is enough for me to hear someone talk sincerely about ideals, about the future, about philosophy, to hear him say “we” with a certain inflection of assurance, to hear him invoke “others” and regard himself as their interpreter—-for me to consider him my enemy. I see in him a tyrant manqué an approximate executioner, quite as detestable as the first-rate tyrants, the first-rate executioners Every faith practices some form of terror, all the more dreadful when the “pure” are its agents. We mistrust the swindler, the trickster, the con man; yet to them we can impute none of history’s great convulsions; believing in nothing, it is not they who rummage in your hearts, or your ulterior motives; they leave you to your apathy, to your despair or to your uselessness; to them humanity owes the few moments of prosperity it has known: it is they who save the peoples whom fanatics torture and “idealists” destroy.

[Anonymous No.19977347]

>>19977119
>There is no such thing as the Void. The One is omnipresent

(The great systems are actually no more than brilliant tautologies. What advantage is it to know that the nature of being consists in the “will to live,” in “idea,” or in the whim of God or of Chemistry? A mere proliferation of words, subtle displacements of meanings. What is loathes the verbal embrace, and our inmost experience reveals us nothing beyond the privileged and inexpressible moment. Moreover, Being itself is only a pretension of Nothingness.We define only out of despair. We must have a formula, we must even have many, if only to give justification to the mind and a facade to the void.Neither concept nor ecstasy are functional. When music plunges us into the “inwardness” of being, we rapidly return to the surface: the effects of the illusion scatter and our knowledge admits its nullity.

[Anonymous No.19977349]

>>19977347
and yet you still exist. curious.

[Anonymous No.19977353]

>>19977332
My goodness, what an outburst, and what boredom behind the bursting. You're impossible to talk to. I hope you won't repeat this at the dinner party, to which I hereby cordially invite you.

[Anonymous No.19977371]

>>19977347
Basesless, almost romantic, and I am not persuaded in the least. Sorry

[Anonymous No.19977373]

>>19977332
>>19977353
You are both irredeemably gay and I hope that you'll stop before you get raped by a pack of niggers.

[Anonymous No.19977380]

>>19977349
>you exist
Affirmation demands not only deliberate self-deception but self-sacrifice as well: how much effort the merest nod to existence can cost! What repudiations must be renounced! They know there is never just one “yes”: each assent implies another, perhaps a whole parade—who can afford to take such risks lightly? Yet the security of negation aggravates the nay-sayers, too, and hence they conceive the necessity and the interest of affirming something—anything.

It is true that negation is the mind’s first freedom, yet a negative habit is fruitful only so long as we exert ourselves to overcome it, adapt it to our needs; once acquired it can imprison us—a chain like any other. And slavery for slavery, the servitude of existence is the preferable choice, even at the price of a certain self-splintering: it is a matter of avoiding the contagion of nothingness, the comforts of the abyss …

[Anonymous No.19977399]

>>19977353
>You're impossible to talk to
Since it is words that bind us to things, we cannot’detach ourselves from things unless we first break with words. The man who relies on them, even if he is a party to every wisdom, remains in servitude and ignorance. On the other hand, anyone who turns from words in horror approaches his deliverance. This horror cannot be learned or communicated: it is brewed in the deepest part of ourselves. A poor wreck who, by the collusion of his anxieties, suffers it, is closer to true knowledge, is more “liberated” than a philosopher unfit to experience it. This is because philosophy, far from eliminating the inessential, digests and delights in it: are not all the efforts it deploys meant to keep us from realizing the double nullity of the word and the world?

[Anonymous No.19977401]

>>19977380
>muh infinite regress
deny existence and you implicitly posit a principle behind existence that allows you to deny existence. Don't deny or affirm existence and you implicitly posit a principle that allows you to remain neutral. Anyway, phenomenal reality is proof enough, but you don't understand it so you cope by saying it's all delusion or empty or whatever. And if you make Nothingness your principle, then it ceases to be Nothingness. You don't understand the One so you mistake it for "Nothingness." Neither does the One affirm or deny or exist or not exist. But it is not Nothingness.

[Anonymous No.19977498]

>>19977401
When Nothingness invades me and, according to an Oriental formula, I attain to the “vacuity of the void,” it so happens that, crushed by such an extremity, I fall back on God, if only out of a desire to trample my doubts underfoot, to contradict myself and, multiplying my frissons, to seek in Him a stimulant. The experience of the Void is the unbeliever’s mystic temptation, his possibility for prayer, his moment of plenitude. At our limits, a God appears, or something that serves his turn.

[Anonymous No.19977542]

Schopenhauer already taught us how we should approach this realization. Goethe taught us, through practice, how we should live.

Live for art, the aesthetic and the beautiful.
Use art as a tool to express your deepest emotions and how you feel about the human condition.

Read this : https://artblot.wordpress.com/2014/01/03/schopenhauer-part-one-the-aesthetic-theory/#:~:text=%E2%80%9C%5BA%20work%20of%20art%5D,the%20communication%20of%20this%20knowledge.%E2%80%9D

[Anonymous No.19977732]

>>19977542
If I had been born a Buddhist, I should have remained one; born a Christian, I ceased being one in early youth when, much more so than today, I would have abounded in the sense of Goethe’s blasphemy when he wrote — the very year of his death — to Zelter, “The Cross is the most hideous image on this earth.”

Grim Death, a “poor portraitist,” according to Goethe, gives faces something false, something outside of truth; it is assuredly not Goethe who, like Novalis, would identify death with the principle that “romanticizes” life. It must be said in his defense that having lived fifty years longer than the author of Hymnen an die Nacht, Goethe possessed all the time required to lose his illusions about death.

[Anonymous No.19977743]

>>19977542
Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, in the last century, spoke best of love and of music. Yet each frequented only brothels and — of all composers — the former adored Rossini, the latter Bizet.

[Anonymous No.19978582]

Bump