/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.22579288]

How do we reconcile two of the greatest minds of the twentieth century - Rene Guenon and Heidegger

Bataille famously mocked Guenon for not having read Heidegger. So how are we to synthesise the two?

[Anonymous No.22579384]

>>22579288
They're two different types of metaphysical discourse. Heidegger draws from Plato and the Presocratics, whereas Guenon draws from the common denominator present in all metaphysical systems, which is in the indic/religious ones, and incidentally in the Greeks. Heidegger's metaphysics is within the (now) secular western philosophical tradition, whereas Guenon's is moreso based on those universal principles (that I above called 'common denominators') present in the esoteric sides of religions. This is just my opinion, but Guenon's (as indeed are is the traditionalists') philosophy is metaphysics in its purest form, and Heidegger's, being within the western tradition of philosophy in the times of modernity, is just a convoluted epistemology. I don't think it is a question of 'reconciling them' both, really.

[Anonymous No.22579447]

>>22579384
Didn’t Heidegger read Evola?

[Anonymous No.22579451]

>>22579288
>How do we reconcile two of the greatest minds of the twentieth century - Rene Guenon and Heidegger
Neither of those two were particularly great minds.

[Anonymous No.22579452]

>>22579288
>greatest minds
longest faces

[Anonymous No.22579461]

>>22579288
just passing by anon... i know it's there for everyone

[Anonymous No.22579463]

>>22579288
>Bataille

[Anonymous No.22579504]

>>22579447
So? Did you read what I said?

[Anonymous No.22579587]

>>22579384
fpbp

[Anonymous No.22579768]

>>22579288
Read Collin Cleary's essay comparing Heidegger and Guenon

[Anonymous No.22579794]

>>22579384
I'll go into more detail if you want, but I'm sorry to say you don't understand Heidegger at all, or at least, you've never read a word beyond Being and Time. Heidegger is practically screaming that he isn't doing metaphysics, and he certainly isn't within the "secular western philosophical tradition". This comes up over and over and over, and is a key point in most secondary literature on Heidegger worth the name. I also have no idea what you mean by saying that Heidegger is just "convoluted epistemology".

[Anonymous No.22579807]

>>22579504
You’re implying as if the Guenon and Heidegger can’t be bridged yet Heidegger engaged with some of Evola’s work

[Anonymous No.22579809]

>>22579768 Link?

[Anonymous No.22579810]

>>22579794
Not that anon but would appreciate if you went into more detail

[Anonymous No.22579816]

>>22579384
>Draws from common denominator
That's a recipe for disaster.

[Anonymous No.22580418]

>>22579816
No it’s literally the most based move in philosophy

[Anonymous No.22580424]

>>22579288
I think you might struggle since Heidegger is repudiating metaphysics where as Guenon is championing pure metaphysics there almost complete opposites with regard to metaphysics

[Anonymous No.22580428]

gweenonsisters...

[Anonymous No.22580459]

>>22580428
Honestly I wonder if Guenon ever saw this lol, it’s actually kinda unfair since Guenon has definitely read Nietzsche since in one of his books I can’t quite remember which one I’m pretty sure it’s in East and West he says Nietzsche’s notion of eternal reoccurrence is wrong.

However I have always wondered what Guenon would have made of Hegel

[Anonymous No.22581468]

>>22580459
>However I have always wondered what Guenon would have made of Hegel

The English mentality, of course, has no aptitude for metaphysical conceptions, but it does not make any pretension in this respect either, while the German mentality, which is not really better endowed, has the greatest illusions. To realize this, we need only compare what the two peoples have produced in terms of philosophy.

The English mind hardly left the practical order, represented by morality, sociology, and experimental science, represented by the science of psychology which it invented. When the English mind is concerned with logic, it is above all induction that he has in view and to which he gives preponderance over deduction. On the other hand, if we consider German philosophy, we only find in it hypotheses and systems with metaphysical pretensions, deductions from a fanciful starting point, ideas which might seem to be profound when they are simply nebulous; and this pseudo-metaphysics, which is everything that is farthest from true metaphysics, the Germans claim to find in others, whose conceptions they always interpret according to their own
- Rene Guenon

[Anonymous No.22581493]

>>22579288
He literally already did it. It's not especially interesting. Merging existentialism and Traditionalism is basically just a way to make conceptual Traditionalism more accessible to the masses without actually connecting them with the bread and butter of Traditionalism, that is, living spirituality.
>>22579384
Heidegger's ontology of Becoming has absolutely nothing to do with Plato's ontology. Nor is Plato's ontology the least bit secular. I must question whether you have read Plato at all.

[Anonymous No.22581510]

>>22581468
>deductions from a fanciful starting point
yeah how is this any different from monkey man's pan-orientalist monistic theology?

[Anonymous No.22581523]

>>22579288
What phenotype is this?

[Anonymous No.22581528]

>>22581523
malnourished + botox + duckface + 25% non-white
not the same phenotype as guenon though. don't know what kind of phenotype guenon has. weird looking fellow.

[Anonymous No.22581543]

>>22581528
>malnourished + botox + duckface + 25% non-white
But that's literally Guenon.

[Anonymous No.22581575]

>>22579288
Guenon looks like Remus Lupin.

[Mothership Loudspeakerz Remix No.22581593]

>>22579288
Shit thread
Sage

[Anonymous No.22581624]

>>22579288
Why the long face?

[Anonymous No.22583046]

>>22581593
Shut up

[Anonymous No.22583053]

With Spengler.

Guenon was nothing more than the second religiousness expressing itself in orientalism. Heidegger was nothing more than skepticism masquerading as classroom philosophy.

Simple.

[Anonymous No.22583075]

>>22581493
I’m not going to pretend to know very much but his Eurasianism seems ridiculous to me at worst and inaccessible to us at best. To me, both Traditionalism and Heideggerian existentialism are two sides of the same coin. In fact, Traditionalism is nothing more than a particular hyper-modern format of existentialism if you ask me and both of these fall apart when you poke at their basic presuppositions. So for Dugin to have synthesized them means basically nothing to us. Maybe it means something to Russians, but not to us. I do think, ironically, Guenon was right when he said that in regard to the modern Western problem one can flee into the past or into the East. In so far as we can flee into the East, it’s not Eurasianism and it’s some syncretic Hindu/Buddhist/Taoist/Suffi/Islam either. It’s the mystical theology of the Eastern Orthodox Church, which is conveniently ignored by most Traditionalists. In so far as we can flee into the past, we can flee into, on one hand, medieval and ancient philosophy and especially theology, but especially also history more generally. I don’t see why overcoming Greek rationalism turned post-modern schizophrenia can’t be as simple as endorsing a sort of medieval pragmatism. All this to say, yeah, Duginism is not that interesting. But history? History is interesting. If you want to synthesize Traditionalism with Heideggerian existentialism, look to history, and not exactly history of philosophy either, but history proper.

[Anonymous No.22583077]

>>22583075
Or maybe “medieval realism” is a better phrase…

[Anonymous No.22583370]

>>22583075
Most of the things you say are inaccurate or incorrect. The "Eurasianism", political pluralism and anti-imperialism of Dugin is merely realpolitik, or Dugin's understanding of what realpolitik is, at any rate. The actual core philosophy of Dugin, the synthesis between Traditionalism and existentialism, consists in a defense of identity. "You shouldn't become a materialist liberal consumer because by engaging with the embodied national forms of your culture, you integrate yourself with the spiritual whole." Something like this. Of course, this integration is purely conceptual and hypothetical, which means it can at best patch over the problem of meaning but not truly resolve it. Dugin himself is Orthodox, and relies on Orthodoxy for his reconnection to spirituality. How well it works for him is another question.
As for the rest of your post, there is actually nothing wrong with "Greek rationalism" which was integrated with a noble spirituality unimaginable to most moderns. A "medieval pragmatist" solution is similarly misguided, because empty conventionalism and mimicry of previous forms will not actually revive the spirit of the people. It is the diametrical opposite solution to the one of awakening the pure and realised spirit, which is the only thing that can turn things around and solve the problem of meaning.

[Anonymous No.22583387]

>>22583075
The metaphysical underpinnings of Guenon and Heidegger cannot be more different.

[Anonymous No.22583560]

>>22583075
You ignored my previous post and look at you, here again with more word salad. You don't understand any of the terms you're throwing around.