/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.9896843]

Have you ascended yet?

[Anonymous No.9896846]

I'm reading Rimbaud and POund; of course I'm ascended

[Anonymous No.9896854]

>>9896846
Buy yourself a pop filter, man

[Anonymous No.9896885]

>>9896843
5, if anything.

Levels 6 and Nirvana are Level -1.

[Anonymous No.9896899]

Level 6 is the same as level -1 desu

[Anonymous No.9896923]

Level 0 can be incredibly useful if "divinity" is redefined

[Anonymous No.9896934]

>>9896843
It seems /lit/ is as polarized as everywhere else.
In one thread we have discussions of being your authentic self - doing what is true to yourself no matter what the world may say.

And then on the other, we have this ultra zen angle, where there is no self - you do whatever because there is no whatever.

[Anonymous No.9896948]

3, it fucking sucks.

[Anonymous No.9896955]

>>9896934
Do not trust anyone who frames the destruction of the self as an end-goal

[Anonymous No.9896958]

>>9896955
*without a level of reconstruction following it, to clarify

[Anonymous No.9896974]

What does Level -∞ look like?

[Anonymous No.9897337]

>>9896843
Level 5 is probably the closest to being "objectively correct" based on our current scientific understanding of the universe.

[Anonymous No.9897358]

>>9896899
this. is that the point?

[Anonymous No.9897361]

>>9896974
Basing your beliefs on /pol/ redpill jpegs

[Anonymous No.9897366]

>>9897337
You mean the entire opposite. Its the most subjective

[Anonymous No.9897380]

>>9896843
>Still stuck in ontotheological categories
>Ascended

[Anonymous No.9897411]

>>9896934
Self is obviously a meme, spread by Western "I am a special, unique snowflake" thinking. You're just the sum of your biology and external experiences. The silly part is jumping to the comical nihilism conclusion. You (in a practical sense) still have the opportunity to affect the external circumstances to a point and doing so, makes life more enjoyable in the end.

[Anonymous No.9897434]

>>9897411
>self awareness, crystallising as a concept that can be held hey updated across time, the most ubiquitous and by far transformative and powerful feature of human consciousness
>a western meme.
WEW.

[Anonymous No.9897464]

>>9897434
Where did "self awareness" creep into this? Based on context it's obvious we're talking about the "self" as some disconnected, firm entity. An ice cube floating in water or some shit, while it's closer to couple drops that are next to each other at the exact moment. The former idea is massively pushed in the West.

[Anonymous No.9897548]

>>9896854
Pretty clever post

[Anonymous No.9897556]

>>9897337
>>9897366
Good point. It is subjective in that we each create our own meaning to existence. I know it's not ""objectively correct"" but I still think it is likely the most rational of the bunch.

[Anonymous No.9897585]

>>9896974
>>9897361
So basically a complete lack of any critical thinking skills.

[Anonymous No.9897639]

>>9897464qq
How do you think you could have self awareness and memory without that leading to an enduring self concept?

[Anonymous No.9897699]

>>9897639
Why would that be a problem? Enduring doesn't imply that it's rigid and not easy affected by external factors. It's enduring enough for "you" not to wake up, not knowing what the fuck is going on, assuming there is some kind of routine.

[Anonymous No.9897704]

Is the last tier just the dogmatic windbag tier?

[Anonymous No.9897709]

Jesus wasn't enlightened.

[Anonymous No.9897729]

>>9896843
4
Wherever I am, I must also rape

[Anonymous No.9897731]

>>9897709
Siddartha believed in Hindu pantheon. He wasn't either. They both have some pretty good teachings though. Jesus' stuff is a bit more circumspect on some points for sure though.

[Anonymous No.9897759]

>>9897731

I dont think they're really comparable, they taught intrinsically different things in intrinsically different environments. I mean, Buddha Sakyamuni taught for 45 years and the pali canon takes up a shelf, Jesus taught for what, three? Not saying that you have to accept one as superior to the other but I don't understand why people compare the two so much tbqh.

[Anonymous No.9897767]

>>9897699
I'm not arguing against any of that, I'm arguing against the notion that self concept is merely a meme.

[Anonymous No.9897776]

>>9896843
>he thinks stage -1 is incorrect
My sides.

[Anonymous No.9897864]

>>9897759
They were both revisionist figures for their religious traditions. They also both had very humanist teachings, which was very new to religions which had previously been almost wholly focused on the "holy other."

[Anonymous No.9899788]

>>9896843
>ego loss
>ascension
>delusional dream
>higher world

spooks my boy, all spooks.

0 is the objective patrician tier.

[Anonymous No.9899811]

>>9896843
haha the highest tier is new age college girl "we're all, like, one" ideology

[Anonymous No.9899818]

>>9896843
>Highest level isn't a recapitulation of the first stage.
Shit chart, m8

[Anonymous No.9899825]

>>9899811
Seriously.
>through miracle you will achieve the highest plane and look beyond the mortal coil
so cliche, op.

[Anonymous No.9899838]

>>9896958
Can you expand on this?

Whereas I can identify with "Level 5," I still see death as the ultimate end (not suicide, just death,) and fear it.

By your first post did you mean self-destruction or destruction of self?

Drifting away from the main discussion, I plan on cryogenizing myself as soon as I get an uncurable disease or have nothing else to live for (Currently I live for money, essentially, as I set my end goal on making as much money as possible because money is the only thing that truly matters, regardless of your state of mind or belief.)

[Anonymous No.9899847]

>>9899838
> I still see death as the ultimate end (not suicide, just death,) and fear it.
Read the greeks, especially Plato's Phaedo.

[Anonymous No.9899850]

>>9899838
I think he was talking about ego death, not literal death. So avoid ideologies that see ego death as the end state, rather than a process by which the ego is destroyed and then rebuilt even better than it was.

To add to that, it's not about destroying the ego, it's about strengthening the fuck out of it and then using it in service of a higher purpose than itself.

[Anonymous No.9899857]

>>9899847
Should I read anything first? Or just jump in head-first?

I can buy it on my amazon and get it in 16 hours.

[Anonymous No.9899866]

>>9899850
I understand now, thank you. In my opinion ego is extremely important for one to respect himself and consequently find a reason to live where there's none.

[Anonymous No.9899915]

>>9899857
Read it online.

[Anonymous No.9900003]

>All knowledge is based on faith

anyone want to expand on this or recommend some authors

[Anonymous No.9900004]

>>9897548
Thank you, anon

[Anonymous No.9900048]

I have ascended. I recently made a post on /x/ describing my profound revelations.

[Anonymous No.9900097]

>>9900048
>can't comprehend
everything with only experiencing 4 dimentions

[Anonymous No.9900104]

>>9896843
where is communism?

[Anonymous No.9900351]

>>9897366
>exists
>thinks subjectivity is bad

[Anonymous No.9900363]

>>9900104
Level 3

[Anonymous No.9900369]

All of that is trashetic memeshit.
5 is only there for teenagers, the rest is just as trashetic.

[Anonymous No.9900372]

Has anyone here ever talked to any Level 1s?

You should. It will expand your mind just looking in their eyes and realizing how fucking little is going on. Full disclosure I dated one so.

Make fun of fedoras or whatever but I'd take those guys over a Level 1 any day holy shit.

[Anonymous No.9900378]

>>9897337
Objectivity doesn't exist, teenager. Science and understanding do not exist. There is no universe.
>>9897556
>rationality is good
Nice meme you fucking adolescent.
'creating meaning' is absolute frogshit trashetics.

[Anonymous No.9900386]

>>9897864
Christ is the absolute antithesis to Humanism. Do not fucking compare Him to that disgusting, heretical ideology.

[Anonymous No.9900387]

>>9900372
So you don't believe God exists, right?
>NO, I think God may or may not exist.
OK, what about concepts like truth or justice? What are they founded upon?
>Science and the law duh

[Anonymous No.9900427]

>>9900387
I'd take this any day because there's a minimal appeal to logic there. A true level 1 will not respond to even basic logic, because everything they say is ineffable. Even attempting to question them is a personal insult to them. Trust me I lived through this hell. I would marry an ugly Fedora in a heartbeat over a hot Level 1.

Also I'm not talking about intelligent Christians who read Aquinas and Plantinga. I'm talking about the kind of person who lives their life based on an invisible emotional 8-ball that can never in any way be questioned or investigated in any way.

[Anonymous No.9900433]

Fedora atheists are the most correct though. There's no way to prove your senses are being tampered with, and even if they are, they are constantly tampered in the same way so scientific method still works best.

[Anonymous No.9900445]

>>9896948

the idea that 'science is inherently unverifiable' misses the point of science. not sure if this helps u

[Anonymous No.9900446]

>>9900427
>logic is good becuz i sed so
Back to /r/eddit
>>9900433
Wrong. You cannot prove anything you've said. At least take yourself seriously enough to be consistent.
You only assume it works because you presuppose it.

[Anonymous No.9900476]

>>9900446
Care to elaborate on why logic isn't "good"?

I know the kind of person the dude you're replying to is talking about. He has a point. Those people can be insufferable

[Anonymous No.9900482]

>>9900445
>the point of science
t. every ideologue ever

[Anonymous No.9900484]

>>9900476
Thanks I'm honestly just venting about a personal experience I had that still shakes me. Like the utter impossibility of getting through to someone you care about.

Also that dude is clearly using logic himself and is arguing and questioning so he's fine in my book.

[Anonymous No.9900485]

>>9900476
Insufferable to an ideologue worshipping a mind meme

[Anonymous No.9900491]

>>9900484
>getting through
As in forcing your ideology onto them? You don't care at all.

[Anonymous No.9900501]

>>9900491
You're giving me flashbacks. Honestly.

[Anonymous No.9900504]

>>9900501
Good, I hope they blind you, tool.

[Anonymous No.9900512]

>>9900504
:' (

[Anonymous No.9900513]

>>9900512
I bet you're a smelly dumb teleiophile scum, too. Fag.

[Anonymous No.9900520]

>>9900513
I can't be with you anymore. No one's ever treated me this way.

[Anonymous No.9900528]

so every 18+ is level 5 philosopher?
for the smug freshman bashing this whole chart seems pretty freshman philosophy to me

[Anonymous No.9900537]

>>9900520
Not my fault that you like disgusting adult women. You see, I'm not like other girls, I'm a man.

[Anonymous No.9900555]

How are 5 and 6 contradictory viewpoints? I probably subscribe to both.

I agree with the others that 1 is the most pleb because at least -1 is internally consistent. 1 makes me want to beat somebody to beat with a philosophy 101 textbook.

[Anonymous No.9900572]

How are 5 and 6 contradictory viewpoints? I probably subscribe to both.

I agree with the others that 1 is the most pleb because at least -1 is internally consistent. 1 makes me want to beat somebody with a philosophy 101 textbook.

Infinite tier is just some woo nonsense.

[Anonymous No.9900577]

>>9900528
Yeah I mean levels 3, 5, and 6 on this chart don't even contradict eachother. This just seems like a chart of philosophy 101 insights.

[Anonymous No.9900580]

>>9900555
waaaaaah muh logic
Philosophy is for children.

[Anonymous No.9900594]

>>9900572
>How are 5 and 6 contradictory viewpoints? I probably subscribe to both.
Because you're a stupid teenager.

[Anonymous No.9900611]

>>9896843
The problem I have with these lists is that you can effectively jumble them up however you want to suit your view of the world. A Deist could just as easily invert the list and claim they have moral certitude. A nihilist or agnostic could rearrange the list to support their own beliefs/lack thereof. So it's basically just an egowank for the OP and a few likeminded souls.

[Anonymous No.9900612]

>>9900378
On the off chance you are being sincere;
how do you KNOW that "There is no universe."
if "understanding do not exist. [sic]" ?

[Anonymous No.9900618]

>>9900612
Not a truth-statement

[Anonymous No.9900640]

>>9900611
True, but the list also needs to be controversial so that OP will get lots of (You)s from all the discussion.
I would argue that the order of the list is not as important as how debatable it is.

[Anonymous No.9900663]

>>9897337
t. non ascended

[Anonymous No.9900669]

>>9900618
>Not a truth-statement
can you elaborate?

[Anonymous No.9900735]

>>9900618
>>9900669
Just to clarify, are you saying that the statement:
>There is a universe.
Is not a truth-statement / logical truth?

[Anonymous No.9900765]

>>9897759
Jesus isn't the only important figure in Christianity you dumb proddy

[Anonymous No.9900774]

>>9900669
>>9900735
God I'm so stupid. Obviously the statement
>There is a universe.
Is a scientific fact, not a logical truth.
Now my retarded shitposts are in the archive FOREVER.

[Anonymous No.9900850]

>>9896955
This

[Anonymous No.9900855]

You retards really have no clue of biology, do you? Huemans are just animals, there are objective observable truth, though our greatest crimes are as insignificant as all our kind acts and goodwill. the post-Darwinian world shows us humans are just animals though animals with varying traits and characteristics, that there are no constraints and we can shape the world in our desire as much as any other animal is 'in control' of their destiny, so while it is all meaningless we have the power to change our ecosystem towards one which common sense morality would see as 'good, rational, peaceful, just' though things like eugenics and killing people of lesser stock. You also cannot call this edgy, because remember what I said...is the tiger edgy for killing its prey? NO

[Anonymous No.9900891]

*protestants are just animals

[Anonymous No.9901110]

>>9900572
what is wrong with 1 exactly?

[Anonymous No.9901178]

>>9899866
>ego is important for the ego to respect the ego

[Anonymous No.9901191]

>>9900855
>behaviorism is the best -ism

[Anonymous No.9901259]

You can't know nothing.

[Anonymous No.9901335]

>>9896854
kek

[Anonymous No.9901541]

>>9897337

you ever read any philosophy of science? no? yeah, i can tell

[Anonymous No.9901544]

>>9900482

what does writing 't.' like that mean?

[Anonymous No.9901619]

>>9896843

Level 0 Master Race.

[Anonymous No.9901718]

>>9896843
>no longer have self-hood
>still refers to self as "I"

[Anonymous No.9901789]

>>9896843
>ultimate self denial tier
>come with me before its too late
>with me before
>me
what a fucking charlatan

[Anonymous No.9902359]

>>9901544
It's like a signature.

t. guy replying to you

[Anonymous No.9902374]

>>9897380
Savage

[Anonymous No.9902500]

>>9900735
No, it's a value-statement.
>>9900774
Facts don't exist.
>>9900855
All wrong
>>9902359
In greentext, it's a signature of the person being replied to.

[Anonymous No.9902509]

Level 7: I'm eating from the trashcan and I'm liking it.

[Anonymous No.9902875]

>>9896843
I've been at 6 for awhile. I didn't go through 4 though. Pure hedonism is silly.

[Anonymous No.9902892]

>>9896843
Holy shit, I just realized I skipped pretty much straight to level 6.

[Anonymous No.9903254]

>>9901541
Alright, you got me.
I guess I just didn't see much value in questioning scientific theories
unless an experiment looked flawed or if the conclusions made seemed
financially or politically motivated.
I thought: Why question the existence or properties of an electron
while using a computer?
I'm genuinely curious though; what is wrong with basing your believes
around prevailing scientific theory?

[Anonymous No.9903340]

>>9896843
Either 6 or Nirvana for me but I'm emotionally fragile so even though I believe what the descriptions say, it is extremely difficult for me to reconcile the dissonance between how I feel and how I think. I have patience from being a tard wrangler since childhood, I sympathize with all opinions because they are equally valid in the minds of their holders, I try to act as selfless as possible without putting myself in danger, I recognize that the universe is absurd and objective facts are only remotely so, and I realize that I have constant short comings like indulging myself now, going on 4chan, and saving this thread.

[Anonymous No.9903363]

>>9903340
*saging dammit

[Anonymous No.9903573]

>>9903254
nobody on 4chan will explain this to, if you want to know the answer read foundational scientific works , ALL of which are deeply imbued with implicit and explicit earth shattering developments in scientific philosophy:

concerning vitalism:

Bernard: Introduction to the Study of Experimental Medicine

Driesch: Gifford Lectures

concerning mathematics:
euclid's elements

more interesting: ptolemy

more generally:

lavoissier: elements of chemistry
bacon: novum organon
newton: principia
anything by pierce

also important but less obviously connected plato, aristotle, and goethe

read any one of these books with seriousness, studiousness, and humility and you will find yourself beginning to unearth the question you cannot seem to identify but is floating around in your mind, it's the question or at least a descendant of the question that is at the heart of the western canon

all I can say is that it is a question concerning investigation, and my friend you have taken everything you know about investigation and how knowledge comes to be for granted, that does not mean what you hold implicitly concerning it isn't true, it's that you could never know whether it was or wasn't because you have no understanding of the tensions it is pointing to, and the problems it is trying to address, and the tensions that it fails to resolve and the problems which it fails to address.

best of luck

[Anonymous No.9903669]

What tier is UG at?

[Anonymous No.9903675]

>>9903573
Thank you for this list anon.
I'll keep what you said in mind.