/lit/ - Literature

>>11056303
not so long ago there was this one beautiful anon on this board who always brought in neoplatonism and other stuff. i always found that stuff pretty wonderful, although i don't think i'm fully neoplatonist myself. or not yet, anyways.

the hindu/buddha stuff works for me because it's part of a cycle. as i said, i kind of wore myself out by going all-in on the materialist side of things, but it really feels like an abyss and there's more to life than that.

so i pretty much unironically believe in a kind of mildly flaky resonance-theory these days, that what you believe makes the world as it is, and as such it's good to just generate positive feedback loops for their own sake. if capitalism ultimately runs on psychology...right? but at the same time, i think it can also be the case that thought kind of runs like a rock-scissors-paper game. one thing checkmates another and so on.

so dialectical non-dualism sounds pretty good. i can understand maybe why aurobindo would appeal. he kind of appeals to me too, i was reading some of his thoughts and aphorisms just the other day.

http://www.hinduwebsite.com/divinelife/auro/auro_aphorisms.asp

the hindus and buddhists are a good look i find for dealing with the excesses and neuroses. whatever brings more sanity and clarity into the world. it's better in the end to be a complete stonehead in a village of really sharp cookies than it is to be a really sharp cookie among stoneheads.

so i guess my own thing would be, assume that you are a stonehead rather than a really sharp cookie, and then do what you can to salute the general intelligence and goodness of those other cookies in the village on their way to becoming whatever they are.

>dem metaphors

a propos of nothing, here's a movie clip worth thinking about. the whole film is amazing but this scene in particular.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHuSRHxBgUg

>>11047721
so is maps of meaning essentially jungian dialectics? if so that's pretty interesting.