/lit/ - Literature

>>12709059
That was a very roundabout way of ignoring the argument and talking about something else instead.
>No it doesn't.
>Traditionalism is the belief that there is an esoteric truth underpinning many of the legitimate religious traditions around the world and they find out what this esoteric truth is by studying what is perennial or common among the legitimate traditions
So if this perennial esoteric truth underlying "legitimate religious traditions" is the "legitimate path," then what's the point of reading traditionalists instead of "legitimate religious tradtions?" Do you actually have a response to how a call for a return to the past can possibly be a result from a past that led us to a place where this would ever be necessary? If decay is the modern condition, then this very condition is the result of the historical development from the past and from the traditions you lionize in your panglossian mythologizing. If the traditions of the past led us to the present you reject, then of what use were the traditions of the past?