[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 114 KB, 474x537, 1418081949424.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5854844 No.5854844 [Reply] [Original]

What are the most empowering value systems are what books (fiction, philosophy, or anything else) are there on them? Not exactly master morality, at least not JUST master morality, but any system where activity are required every day in order to fulfill it.

>> No.5854862

Protestant work ethic.

>> No.5854879

Mishima, especially Sun and Steel

>> No.5854883
File: 1.52 MB, 1845x2331, 1413235160820.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5854883

>>5854862
>2015
>still being a Protestard

>> No.5854886

>>5854883
Churge of Ameriga ≠ all Protestantism. Many Protestant Churches originated in America, many didn't.

>> No.5854917

>>5854844
what does PIOUS mean?

>> No.5854921

>>5854917
Eusebeia?

>> No.5854961

>>5854917
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pious

>> No.5855003
File: 121 KB, 542x661, 1402991013460.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5855003

>>5854886

>> No.5856322

>>5855003
How is this relevant?

>> No.5856476

Kierkegaard

>> No.5856858

>>5854862
Protestant work ethic is just about being a prole, it's not about accomplishing anything.

Have you actually read Nietzsche, OP?

>> No.5858517

>>5856858
sounds like you haven't read nietzsche

>> No.5858548

stirner after reading stoicism, plato and nietzsche

>> No.5858902

Virtue ethics, though one that keeps in mind that Virtues are historically determined, rather than universal.

Alternatively (or maybe not...), Nietzschean/Derridaean perspective in which interpretative play gives rise to new, shifting values and meanings.

>> No.5858977

>>5854844
There is nothing deeper or more valuable than Christianity, but of course just hearing that insight isn't going to help anybody.

You need You need long and devastating suffering on your own cross before you can begin to really deeply resonate with Christ's cross.

If you're "lucky," OP, you'll be skewered by life and emotionally mutilated past the point of madness over the course of many years, and then you'll find the answer to your question yourself.

>> No.5859274

>>5858977
Isnt Christianity all about prostration to god an dwelling on ones own sinfullness and weakness? Isnt it the slave morality that the OP wants to avoid?

>> No.5859283

Jesus' ethics are objectively perfect.

>> No.5859290

>>5859274
No, not really. Nietzsche was literally insane, so everything he wrote should be taken with a grain of salt. Master and slave morality are just different categories of right & wrong/good & bad. A life spent trying to bring others under your power will probably end in misery and be spent in anger. Why not love your neighbor instead of trying to conquer him? If your only answer is 'because that's how a slave would act,' congratulations, you got trolled by a crazy German dude.

>> No.5859291

>>5859283
>calling anything objective
>calling anything perfect

>> No.5859293

>>5859290
you are fucking retarded

>> No.5859294

>>5859291
God is objectively perfect.
Jesus is god.
Therefore, Jesus is objectively perfect.

>> No.5859298

>>5859293
U mad?

>> No.5859299

>>5859290
OP specifically stated he wanted books that would empower him along the lines of master morality, you have suggested the polar opposite.

Its not like OP asked what is the best way to live ones life. Your straw-manning of Nietzche doesn't change this.

A moral system that holds man to be irredeemably corrupt and weak and only capable of experiencing justice in death is not a system that will assit OP.

>> No.5859304

>>5859299
Yes it is, but whatever.
Mein Kampf, The Prince, Marcus Aurelius' Meditations, and Stirner might be what OP wants, but he wants something stupid. Love > hate. Man is irredeemably corrupt and weak, but he has been redeemed and strengthened-and not by 'masters' but by the Lord.

>> No.5859316

>>5859304
>No, not really. Jesus was literally insane, so everything believed to be his teachings should be taken with a grain of salt. Master and slave morality are just different categories of right & wrong/good & bad. A life spent trying to peacefully love those who have power over you will probably end in misery and be spent in disappointment. Why not seek justice in this world and resist the wicked instead of trying to love him? If your only answer is 'because that's how a sinner would act,' congratulations, you got trolled by a crazy Jewish dude.

>but he has been redeemed and strengthened-and not by 'masters' but by the Lord.

Unfortunately this strengthening in this day and for an overwhelming part of the faiths history has been slavish obedience to authority figures and the status quo and a sheep like mentality.

>> No.5859328

>>5859316
The essence of Christianity is the same now as it was when Christ walked the earth. The existence of institutions you perceive to be standing in the way of your selfish goals doesn't invalidate Jesus' teachings.

>> No.5859338

>>5859328
Those teachings are only helpful to those who believe in receiving justice in the afterlife . That isnt really empowering for most people. There are much better religions when it comes to this.

>The essence of Christianity is the same now as it was when Christ walked the earth

It is not at all, which is reflected by Christians having to adapt to the extended delay of the second coming.

>The existence of institutions you perceive to be standing in the way of your selfish goals doesn't invalidate Jesus' teachings.

Where does this come from? Where did I say that his teachings were invalidated by those words you forced into my mouth

"The existence of institutions you perceive to be standing in the way of your selfish goals"

>> No.5859355

>>5859338

>It is not at all
Wrong, the actions of Christians don't change what Christ calls all of us to be and do.
>Where does this come from? Where did I say that his teachings were invalidated by those words you forced into my mouth
Here:
>It is not at all, which is reflected by Christians having to adapt to the extended delay of the second coming.
I think you misunderstand Christianity. There's more to it than justice in the afterlife. You're building strawmen here. Loving your neighbor has demonstrable effects in this world. Striving to live a Christ-like life requires a great degree of involvement in the world.

>> No.5859373

>>5859355
>Wrong, the actions of Christians don't change what Christ calls all of us to be and do.

First of all to say this ignores the fact the bible and the christian faith goes beyond the direct words and teachings of Christ secondly giving away all your possessions to spend your days warning of the immanent judgment is not something that can be effectively done for nearly 2000 years without addition whether through tradition or revelation.

How does me saying

"It is not at all, which is reflected by Christians having to adapt to the extended delay of the second coming."

imply that I believe christian institutions stand in the way of my "selfish" goals?

>I think you misunderstand Christianity. There's more to it than justice in the afterlife. You're building strawmen here. Loving your neighbor has demonstrable effects in this world. Striving to live a Christ-like life requires a great degree of involvement in the world.

If you think l damnation and the prospect of eternal bliss and connection with God are not the foundation of Christianity then it is you who are mistaken. This life is a mere waiting room, a test a blink of the eye compared the eternity that awaits. Jesus and the martyrs that followed him did not face death willingly because "Loving your neighbor has demonstrable effects in this world".

Why else do you think there was such urgency in his message?

If that were the case many people from other religions and philosophies with similar beliefs regarding the love of your fellow humans would have produced simmilar results.

>> No.5859392

>>5859373
>If you think l damnation and the prospect of eternal bliss and connection with God are not the foundation of Christianity then it is you who are mistaken.
Maybe that's the foundation, but there's the rest of the building, too. I'm only mentioning the effects Christianity has had in this world because you implied that there aren't any, or at least that Christians don't think about this world at all.
It's obvious that you don't actually have any kind of understanding of Christianity. No other religions encourage love of human beings like Christianity does.
>Judaism: love your fellow Jews
>Islam: praise Allah and love him; your fellow humans exist to serve Him
>Buddhism: stop pretending your fellow humans are and stop pretending to love them.
>Hinduism: sexual love is awesome!
>Hellenism: the gods are all assholes and demand your love, otherwise you'll end up like poor Odysseus. Fuck boys all day every day. Courage and strength are more important than love.
>Christianity: For God so loved the world that He gave His only son, so that anyone who would believe in Him might not perish but have eternal life.
I dare you to find a religion that encourages love, peace, and progress to a greater degree than Christianity. Protup: you can't.

>> No.5859413

>>5859392
>Maybe that's the foundation,

Its far more that that its the prime motivator and source of inspiration and why Christs life had to play out as it did. There is a reason why people are Christians instead of humanists.

> I'm only mentioning the effects Christianity has had in this world

Except you don't, if I critices the worldly practice of Christians you state that you are only talking about the teachings of Christ whilst if I focus purely on the teachings you then state I ignore the matters of the world.

>Islam: praise Allah and love him; your fellow humans exist to serve Him

You think Humans do not exist to serve God? Christians might have a different way of doing so but its fundamentally the same concept of surrender and submission to gods will even if he is more benevolent that the Islamic concept.

>Buddhism: stop pretending your fellow humans are and stop pretending to love them.

Yeah lets just forget about the noble eightfold path. Divorcing yourself from harmful attachment to ephemeral desires is very different from what write.

>I dare you to find a religion that encourages love, peace, and progress to a greater degree than Christianity. Protup: you can't.

Are you talking based purely on theory or worldly practice?

>> No.5859453

>What are the most empowering value systems are what books (fiction, philosophy, or anything else) are there on them?

Your own. How can you call yourself empowered, when you don't even have your own philosophical system to follow? You're following the words of someone else. Following in their footsteps.

Also, while you're at it invent your own religion, and refuse to accept the scientific community as a valid authority; only you can judge the validity of their papers.

Otherwise, you're not empowered. You're just a slave who's playing pretend, while the chains on your wrists and ankles lead to the hands of other men.

>> No.5859592

>>5859413
Practice and theory both emphasize the importance of doing good works, unless you're some kind of backwards Protestant.
The Eightfold Path is a path to peace and requires absolute detachment from the world for the purposes of escaping suffering. Christianity is fundamentally different.
Humans exist to serve God, but they also exist to love one another.
People become Christians for many reasons. Christ died for many reasons. God works in incomprehensible ways.

>> No.5859626

>>5859283
Calm down there, Kant.

>> No.5861404

>>5859274
No, precisely the opposite. It's about waking up and freeing oneself from societal programming.

Like I said, you need to go through some shit before this becomes understandable.

Remember, you don't have to judge Christianity by the people who profess to believe it.

>> No.5861717

>>5859592
>Practice and theory both emphasize the importance of doing good works, unless you're some kind of backwards Protestant.

You still havent answered my question. If you are talking about practice then Christianity has a fairly poor record with its wars of religion, stance on slavery and compliance in imperialism and dictatorships. As far as practice goes the Mormons would probably have the greatest claims to make as far as any christian group could be concerned.

If it is theory then humanists, Bahai, Engaged and won Buddhists and possibly the Jains could make more legitimate claims in these areas.

>The Eightfold Path is a path to peace and requires absolute detachment from the world for the purposes of escaping suffering. Christianity is fundamentally different.

So you limit love to the Christian definition and then chastise other faiths for not living up to it? Freeing humanity from all suffering is an immensely loving act.

To use your reasoning I could say the libertarians who religiously follow the non-aggression principle are more loving than Christians.

>Christ died for many reasons. God works in incomprehensible ways.

Almost all of which were auxiliary to the point I made.

>>5861404

>No, precisely the opposite. It's about waking up and freeing oneself from societal programming.

It not the opposite at all reflecting on mans fallen nature and the need for God is a crucial aspect in understanding Christianity and the importance of humility and wickedness of pride (which you know led to the whole fall of man in the first place). If man was perfectible or even able to improve sufficiently improve in this life there would have been no need for the sacrifice. It is the highest form of arrogance to assume otherwise and all the great saints and figures in Christianity have followed this reasoning to a tee.

>Like I said, you need to go through some shit before this becomes understandable.

Absolute rubbish, remember when Jesus told everyone how only those who suffer may understand his love and that of his Father? Oh wait he didnt say that. Likewise I guess all those theologians, and saints and lay people who didnt suffer had an incorrect understanding of Christianity.

>Remember, you don't have to judge Christianity by the people who profess to believe it.

The twisted and watered down theology that you profess to be Christianity has no relevance to one of the greatest faiths in the world and your degrading of it to function as a salve to your experience and life is terribly unfortunate.

>> No.5861761

>>5861717
As. I said earlier, you don't seem to have a good understanding of Christianity. Your knee-jerk reactions are fedora-tier. Every religion has fought holy wars. I'm using the Christian definition of love because it's the one I understand and probably the best one. Christianity is not synonymous with pacifism. The non-aggression principle doesn't reflect love in any sense. How exactly are Mormons the best practical Christians? Freeing humanity from all suffering implies the possibility of freedom from suffering, and that freedom involves ceasing to exist. Christian freedom from death involves eternal happiness rather than a cessation of being.
You're avowedly anti-Christian, which prevents you from seeing the fact that Nietzsche's characterization of it is as biased as your own, if not more so. Try reexamining Christianity. You might be surprised to find it isn't as backwards as you think it is.

>> No.5861800

>>5859453
This is the dumbest shit I've ever read

>> No.5861872

>>5861761
>As. I said earlier, you don't seem to have a good understanding of Christianity. Your knee-jerk reactions are fedora-tier.

And your watering down of doctrine is Unitarian Universalist tier.

>Every religion has fought holy wars

Bahi haven’t not, Jains have not, many indigenous and pagan faiths have not and no religion with the possible exception of Islam has fought them on the same and destructive scale and frequency as Christianity has had.

>I'm using the Christian definition of love because it's the one I understand and probably the best one.

Can you not see the problem here “I understand this one the best therefore it is probably true” would it not be more reasonable to suspend judgement and study the other conceptions of love before writing off other faiths and acting in accordance with the Christian one?

>Christianity is not synonymous with pacifism.

Unfortunately not but Christ’s teachings are absolutely pacifistic

>The non-aggression principle doesn't reflect love in any sense.

It reflects a desire end violence and poverty in the world, rather to benefit and entrench this violence and poverty.

>How exactly are Mormons the best practical Christians?

The greatest amount of Charity and missionary work with the least amount of violence, tyranny and distortion of doctrine to suit short term pleasure.

>Freeing humanity from all suffering implies the possibility of freedom from suffering, and that freedom involves ceasing to exist. Christian freedom from death involves eternal happiness rather than a cessation of being.

Once again you are failing Buddhism by Christian standards which you have admitted you only adhere to out of ignorance of the alternatives.

>You're avowedly anti-Christian, which prevents you from seeing the fact that Nietzsche's characterization of it is as biased as your own, if not more so.

I’m not actually I have immense respect for them and the protestant tradition and have no like or appreciation of Nietzches toxic individualism. What I am against is people who degrade the faith to soothe and justify their experience and represent the worst of the protestant tradition. Out of this respect I dont have to hide or try and justify failed experiences of the past and present I accept them for what they are and move on.

>Try reexamining Christianity. You might be surprised to find it isn't as backwards as you think it is.

Not once in our entire exchange have I said Christianity is backward. Argue my points rather than those of the fedora-wearing-has-never-experianced-suffering strawman you imagine me to be.

>> No.5861887

Baghavad Gita

>> No.5861891
File: 66 KB, 480x536, shoo.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5861891

>>5854883
>implying that proddies didn't give us the greatest maymay

>>5854886
Protestantism has it's roots in Europoors, specifically Martin Luther. All branches come back to him. (Though you could argue the Anglican Church is a different story, the King would never have done that if it weren't for Martin Luther)

>> No.5861905

>>5861891
>(Though you could argue the Anglican Church is a different story, the King would never have done that if it weren't for Martin Luther

The split occurred before Martin Luther was even born.

>> No.5861914

>>5861905
Wow nigga read a damn book
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acts_of_Supremacy

>> No.5861922

>>5861914
My mistake you are correct.

>> No.5862141

>>5861872
I'm using Christian standards because I'm a Catholic defending my religion from your fedora-tier reasoning. Come back when you've accepted Christ. Enjoy your will to power.

>> No.5862167

>>5862141
>Accuses me of fedora tier reasoning
>only responds to one of my points

Did you forget the part where I denounced Nietche and responded fairly reasonable to your points?

Aside from the UU banter what statement was actually fedora reasoning?

Do you think I am incorrect when I stated that Christs Teachings are absolutely pacifistic?

>> No.5862281

Your answer is in your own pic, OP