/lit/ - Literature

most of 20th century intellectual and cultural history is about this in one way or another, the so-called historicizing of kant's categories

you might be interested in hacking's historical ontology or daston's historical epistemology as starting points

>>14585240
Thanks. The hacking book as well as dastons objectivity seem like something I’ve been looking for! The latter even references the former.

>>14585229
The Book of Thoth.

>>14585229
Unironically pic related.

>>14585229
Kali worship only started in the middle ages.

>>14586280
i was hoping you'd find objectivity but didn't want to overload you, that book should definitely introduce you to some of the best stuff in the field

it's not the only way to do this kind of thing but it is cool and it's currently trendy in history of science/science studies

>>14586501
Didn't know pewdiepie became this based lately.

>>14586501
Guenon's approach to the Chinese tradition is a joke. His attempts to approach Chinese thought from an indo-european frame of mind demonstrate a clear lack of comprehension, leading to ridiculous interpretations that lack any semblance of accuracy.

I will thus have to discount your suggestion, as studying the unique structure of China's philosophical development (in contrast to other regions of the world) promises to provide OP with a significant wealth of understanding that he seeks, and suggesting an author who is incapable of grasping with this foreign framework of thought is absurdity manifest.

>>14586564
Guenon (pbuh) explains Chinese Tradition from the point of view of a true Chinaman in "The Great Triad".

>>14586564
>approach Chinese thought from an indo-european frame of mind
The chinese peoples are ethnically indo-european if one goes back far enough. Their tradition is essentially a reinterpretation of the Vedic Truth bought to India by the Hyperboreans.

>>14586622
Incorrect. He works in ignorance of critical concepts central to Chinese thought, his erroneous orientalism is structured in such a way that he proceeds to stray further and further from the actual Chinese tradition into a laughable amalgam of his own western-shaped mental box.

He never even touches on the inseperability of ancient conventionalism that forms one of the most important aspects of Chinese onto-epistemology. Anyone who takes Guenon's writings seriously is being being mercilessly swindled.

>>14586673
Wrong. Chinese migration predates even the proto-indo-europeans, by about 155,000 years.

>>14586519
Oh I didn’t mean anything by it, it just happened to be in my camera roll.
>>14586539
>it's not the only way to do this kind of thing
Thanks again anon. What other ways are you talking about? More esoteric approaches that are not trendy anymore bc everything got more scientistic or something?
>>14586564
>studying the unique structure of China's philosophical development (in contrast to other regions of the world) promises to provide OP with a significant wealth of understanding
Going from the micro to the macro would be interesting too I guess. Especially when it does not focus on the western tradition a comparison could be of merit. Any books that you’d personally recommend? I think I have some history of Chinese philosophy stuff bookmarked somewhere but I forget the title or even author.
>>14586501
Not sure if serious or memeing me into something you yourself have not read. Be that as it may if going by our own standards (ie reading order I should have read half a dozen other works of evola before tackling this which i have not)

>>14586673
>brought to India by the Hyperboreans
Who do you think the Hyperboreans were? In antiquity, the Chinese are known as "celestials". The classical thinkers who thought that the hyperboreans were from the North were mistake. They merely sailed to Europe through the north pole, going around the northern Siberian coast. They arrived in the western orient through the Dzungarian gate, passing through the Gobe desert into the Steppes of Eurasia.

>>14585229
>Female god who decapitates and drinks her male victims blood
>Feminist icon
This has to be fake

>>14586838
A History of Chinese Philosophy Vol I & II - Fun Yu-Lang

As bonus reading, I also recommend this paper:
Skepsis as a Metaphysical Principle and Epistemological Practice: Some Taoist and Greek Comparisons - Walter Benesch

>>14586880
Out of all of the things you can choose to criticize about Kali in legend, you choose the fact that she's brutal against the forces of evil to try and delegitimize Her potential to inspire female empowerment?

Are you fucking serious?

>>14586899
It's extreme, that's what it is. When i think "Female empowerment", Kali would be one of the last characters in my mind.

>>14586911
Yes won't someone think of the poor demons?

The mother goddess has her origins in Bengal, where women are known for having hot tempers and not putting up with anything. Kali's nature reflects the culture that she was born in.

>>14586756
>Incorrect. He works in ignorance of critical concepts central to Chinese thought, his erroneous orientalism is structured in such a way that he proceeds to stray further and further from the actual Chinese tradition into a laughable amalgam of his own western-shaped mental box.
>He never even touches on the inseperability of ancient conventionalism that forms one of the most important aspects of Chinese onto-epistemology. Anyone who takes Guenon's writings seriously is being being mercilessly swindled.
>Wrong. Chinese migration predates even the proto-indo-europeans, by about 155,000 years.

t. has not read a single word of the great gnostic Sufi Sheykh Abd Al-Wahid Yahya (pbuh).

>>14586838
>should have read half a dozen other works of evola
Lmao. Where did you get that idea? Evola is a cheap imitation of Guenon whose ideas (when they happen to be correct) are limited to what Guenon already talked about. You can start with "Crisis of the Modern World", it's a short book.

>>14586756
>155,000 years

whew lad lol

>>14587216
this. it is clear that the manifested universe is 5780 years old at this time.

>>14586539
Cool, but in my experience, a lot of modern stuff in epistemology of history tends to be trending towards antithesis instead of just trying for a wholistic review. Though I guess that may be the influence of postmodernism seeping in. Guess what I’m saying is that they Puppet a “kosher” understanding of a subject then analyze and refute it without going into its own intricacies. I guess it’s good for introductory stuff to get into the mindset, but after that keeping the paradigm maintains an implicit sense of reaction.

>>14586501
Based.

>>14587199
Lmao Freudian slip you could say. I mixed up the 2 /lit/ meme traditionalists. Also I’m familiar with the chart but for some reason I remembered the book in the pewdiepie meme being at the position the multiple states of being is. I wanted to give guenon a shot for the longest time though.been Getting mixed signals though for years so I gotta see for myself I guess.

>>14587365
>I wanted to give guenon a shot for the longest time
just pick up any of the first three books on that chart, his writing style is very clear to follow and he explains his thought well.

>Kali
Begone, thot.

>>14587262
Which thinkers present a more wholistic or even neutral (if at all possible) view?

>>14585229
Dilthey's Introduction to the social sciences has exactly what you're looking for.

>>14586564
You haven't read his work have you?

>>14587838
Idk there probably is. I usually maintain myself with a few older writers since the biases they do have seem more “genuine” instead of self inflicted with postmodernism that is explicitly reactionary. I read Japan an attempt at interpretation, and the writer definetely works within a western paradigm while being a complete japanophile. I guess I enjoyed it because I was the one analyzing him analyzing the Japanese, lol.


I get kind of depressed when reading post structurealist due to the at least initial puppeteering of a straw man.

What I look for is the process in writing. If they begin not by trying to refute or argue against another, but instead create a natural conclusion I enjoy it. And don’t try to pin me as a nostalgist, there are definitely some big names that do a similar thing. John Locke in the first of the two treatise, and somewhat in the second is also a perpetrator.

I guess I dislike the active (note as a general concept I don’t mind it, it is even useful, but intententionallytrying to implement it is self defeating) use of Hegelian dialectics in the Marxist sense.