/lit/ - Literature

>>17820270
I went from Catholic to atheist to "Gnostic" to atheist again. Gnosticism works as an interesting idea but not as an actual religion. I feel the void creeping out on me already, lads.

>>17820283
i know how you feel. Gnosticism seems to return your faith to pure potential, meaning it is very hard to run with for a long time.

>>17820283
Gnosticism can give no meaning to the Eucharist, let alone the Incarnation. Without these, Christianity loses all its significance and value. What is there to struggle with?

Irenaeus' Against Heresies

Read scholastic philosophers like Aquinas to understand that the universe is not dualistic, i.e. evil does not really exist

>>17820317
You wouldn't get it, but this is a real struggle people go through. look at st augustine

>>17820316
Exactly

deepen your alienation from Christianity.

>>17820324
>>17820325
>this thing I denote by these properties doesn't actually exist bro
and they call gnosticism incoherent. don't listen to demiurge apologists

>>17820283
take meds, meat molecules

>>17820270
Castaneda, idiot. Your fucking "beliefs" are a temporary cope, virtue signalling.

>>17820388
>virtue signalling
not at all

>>17820388
worst namefag here

>>17820388
What do you mean "virtue siginalling"??

>>17820270

I am a Catholic but I will recommend you non religious literature

Read Voegelin's "New Science of Politics, Order and History", and "Science, Politics and Gnosticism"

It will make you understand why gnosticism is a bad idea

>>17820428
laughing my fucking ass off, >Voegelin. the guy who never read a lick of the Nag Hammadi confusing the diagnosis for the cure, 50 years of American conservatism poisoned by le gnostic bogeyman.

read Sloterdijk's paper on Gnosticism in After God, he obliterates Voegelin and all these pseuds.

>>17820406
>>17820410
hello shilly, take your shekel.

>>17820428
Op here, i have read both of those. They are very good refutations of the damage Gnosticism does to external society, but he doesn't refute "speculative Gnosticism" which for me only makes it worse. i have a divide between what my logic sees as an evil and destructive thing (gnosticism) and what i feel is true. You could say its an issue of what jung called "psychic energy"

>>17820524
tldr. i see gnosticism as destructive to society, and possibly the root cause but am also deeply attracted to it

>>17820534
how is i destructive to society

>>17820428
faggot, you cannot prove you are catholic, not to me, to anyone, to God. you faggot just want to be liked, and use identity as tattoo. tattoos change, identity changes, "beliefs". were you adopted by muslim family they would train you as a dog to bark "I am muslim" and "allah is great". you are a product of indoctrination. "I am clever and handsome and catholic". only stupid pathetic clowns tell other people what they think about themselves, exalt themselves.

>>17820544
its inherently elitist and anti reproduction, meaning it catalysis a society's death. I shouldn't really have to explain why an ideology which sees the world as evil isn't going to make the world a better place. If "hylics" compose the majority of people i don't know why you would want to save them

>>17820410
I mean this faggot says "I am catholic" to please his mom and dad, or any other boss.

>>17820549
bro youre lame, go somewhere else

>>17820566
no

>>17820561
seems like you're torn between your love for the world and an intuitive attraction to gnostic ideas. why else would you care about making the world "a better place" if you believe it is the domain of evil?

ironic, people discuss which -ism is better, and nobody seeks truth. word truth forgotten. just as love.

>>17820584
I don't know thats why i made the thread. i don't think i hate the world, but i don't really know anymore

>>17820600
what are you attracted to in gnosticism then

>>17820620
the deep spirituality it offers

>>17820587
cringe

>>17820625
renounce the world, or come up with a gnosticism that is pro-cosmic and pro-natalist. it's not like there's a dogma you have to adhere to

>>17820642
what are you?

>>17820654
i waffle between different gnostic thematics, ive worked on my own "system" and generally see nag hammadi, secondary literature, etc. as enforcing the visions/intuitions at its heart. speculative gnosticism, informed by lived experience today, and not bone-dry bugman scholasticism, is extremely invigorating and pure

>>17820684
sound cool, i would like to hear more

>>17820693
im cut from the same cloth as david lindsay and nimrod de rosario. i see the world as a parasite or vampire feeding on a primordial light source. i dont feel any friendship or love for the prime mover, traditional theodicies are wack to me. modern wageslave society is compliant with the program of evil that is "progress", "evolution", "growth." the god inside me is greater than the god of the world, because goodness is always superior to power.

>>17820638
The eternal refutation of the 17 yo tradcath. You forgot to post a fedora tipper as well though.

>>17820749
I'm an atheist. That tripfag is just cringe.

>>17820638
cringe

>>17820270
man I am going through the same thing, Christ help us.
"And straightway the father of the child cried out, and said with tears, Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief."

>>17820330
maybe OP should read confessions?

>>17820441
I don't think Voegelin made an indistinction between modern political profane ideologies and the gnosticist sects, coalescing, say, marxists with valentinians. The idea is more or less how the false dualism between man and the world present in the profane ideologies recall the false dualism of (most) gnosticist sects and mythologiess.

>>17820270
Gnosticism is a simulation of christianity, a watered down form.

>>17820441
>>17821203
To complement my point, I would say both could be seen by Voegelin in the relation of microcosm and macrocosm. Man is the antipodal force against the world, the evil must be transcended by our own power, be it in ourselves (microcosm - gnosticism) or in the world/civilization/society (macrocosm - profane ideologies).

>>17821219
Gnosticism predates Christianity.

>>17821203
i can make an argument that christian eschatology has more to do with the loss of this metaxic tension than whatever formal similarities it shares with gnostic speculation. my point is Voegelin should keep his trap shut and stop trying to associate modernity with the one system of traditions that would (and does) despise it.

there is no false dualism in gnosticism, it is a radical arch-dualism, the false dualism voegelin tries to link to gnosticism betrays his misunderstanding of both traditions

>>17821149
I highly recommend the Confessions. Read through it over a couple weeks two summers ago. I look forward to meeting the man himself someday.

>>17821230
no, false transcendence of the world through the world isn't a "macrocosmic" extension of the premises latent in microcosmic transcendence, it's a COUNTER-GNOSTIC tendency. that's what voegelin doesn't get.

>>17821219
it's actually completely, unequivocally, the other way around. it's hilarious how conditioned human beings can be

And to complement MY point, no, the opposition between life (or self) and the world doesn't permit me to see programs of world-transcendence as being gnostic, the exact opposite actually (Baur did the same trying to identify the Hegelian Spirit with the gnostic tendency: wrong).This is what Voegelin couldn't get, and his incomprehension unsurprisingly muddied the issue. I'm positive an archon was whispering in his ear.

>>17821249
But what you don't get is that it is counter-''gnostic'' in a relational monolithic ontology - precisely in contrasted to that of gnosticism! To profane ideologies, the political is the center, the ground because of the very nature of politics - material, economical, sociological structure.

>>17821237
>christian eschatology has more to do with the loss of this metaxic tension than whatever formal similarities it shares with gnostic speculation.
This is so out of nowhere as for what we are discussing that I wonder what you even mean by this.

>modernity with the one system of traditions that would (and does) despise it.
Have you read any gnosticist theogonic mythology? Nonbinary, transexual people are the expression of the immanent break of hylic constraints. In the end both refer to the same ''hunger''.

>there is no false dualism
Indeed, false dualism is almost oxymoronic, but you get my point of it being false in absolute sense. Read Plato.

>>17820270

as someone who was (briefly) enamored with gnosticism, i'd abandon any depressed navel gazing or studying about it, and replace it with advaita vedanta and neoplatonism. not only is gnosticism extremely incomplete and ahistorical, the many mysteries that gnosticism will push on you are better answered nearly anywhere else. its a waste of time

>>17821326
>trannies are an immanent consequence of gnosticism
Oh, you're one of those. I shouldn't have expected anything less than from a Voegelin reader.

>>17821338
but that isn't what he said.

>>17821231
How?

>>17820367

>>17821338
>immanent consequence of gnosticism
Another dishonest gnosticist? I shouldn't have expected otherwise, huh? This is not what I mean at all, gnosticism has no direct cause to those sentiments, but the dualistic subjectivism is a form of radical dualism present in gnosticism, correlation =/= causation. Can you now discuss seriously and above all honestly? Take, for example, Thunder! The Perfect Mind. Read about how pertinent it is to modern gender issues, however this will be obviously a distortion - just like gnosticism itself is a distortion of duality, phaenomena, aesthetics and consequently, spirituality, pneuma. Gnosticism is half true, half falsity. Their dualism is their very mentality blinding the whole picture.

I don’t struggle with Christian faith, because Christianity is far too embarrassing to be taken seriously in the first place

>>17820638
yep, love is cringe! shills shill only hate today.

>>17821488
Love for a faith healing con artist who started the ancient version of Qanon, will totally take away all of your problems if you just obey him mindlessly and will totally come back any day now is indeed pretty cringe

>>17820718
>modern wageslave society is compliant with the program of evil that is "progress", "evolution", "growth."
this is where gnosticism begins to stumble on itself. if the world is inherently evil, in what sense can evil “progress”? there is no need to further worsen or better people’s lives when life itself is ontologically torment. the only option becomes escape, which really is nonsensical. by what principle do you know if the gnosis you believe to have isn’t some cruel trickery of the demiurge to further torture you into false hope? gnostics inadvertently place themselves at the whim of descarte’s demon, or in place of a brain in a jar. it essentially is a self defeating narrative.

neoplatonist occultism offers far better models of understanding the universe. in it, we are displaced from the One and caught between two poles: God and “anti-God” (which can be nominally characterized in some veins of thought as lucifer, ahriman, etc). evil can still be thought of as the absence of good, and anti-God can be conceived as subsumption into pure non-existance. in this model, the progress of evil is to move humanity (and the universe itself) further away from God by destroying the aspects that make us human - free will, spiritual intuition, moral understanding, language etc. in this model, material reality is inherently good, not evil, as it is in perpetual relation to God. the phases of evil involve first the disconnection of the physical world from God, and then the elimination of existence itself.

i would explain more but i am on my phone right now. i recommend Christ and Sophia by valentin tomberg if the topic interests you more. many of the ideas i find are compatible with christianity.

>>17821258
Yeah but the thing is, it is. Sorry lad

Read the Enneads. gnosticism is retarded. Most self-titled gnostics don't even have a basic grasp of gnosticism.

>>17821772
No, but your mom sure has a basic grasp of my dick

>>17821604
evil perfects its power to capture and imprison light. I can't be deceived about the nature of love or goodness, anymore than descartes can be deceived about the fact of his own existence, even if it is the condition of a pervasive, ontological deception.

there is a love that is demiurge compliant (charity that prolongs and teases out suffering, for example), but marcion's great innovation was to posit a Good higher than good. if i am being deceived about the nature of this Good, then I can posit another one rung up the ladder. at every point I am doing justice to an ethical intuition that emanationist schemes don't.

and i don't buy emanationist schemes. i don't see the anti-god as a cliff edge that threatens to cut off the outflow of divine energies, i see it as a counter-condition, positive, actively hostile to the source. a God whose every immanent possibility includes evil is not God, it's just a singularity hemorrhaging into manifestation without care.

>>17821772
that's funny, most """neoplatonists""" don't have a basic grasp of gnosticism either

>>17821786
Bitch it's 2021 and there is no worthwhile gnostic literature that isn't just theosophy nonsense.

my christianity consists of gnosticism

>>17821792
sloterdijk just wrote a paper on gnosticism published this year. you're an undergrad who just got assigned aquinas and wants to tell everyone how hecka epic he is

>>17821371
trannies, transhumanism, the christian ideal of agape, and gnosticism all originate from the same torsion in consciousness, however you want to thematize that torsion is up to you, but what's really dishonest is conflating one superstructure with another, without piercing to their mutual ground.

>>17821748
>nuh uh
so this is the power... of catholizards...

>>17821866
Do some basic research on "gnosticism". Unless you're going off some weird esoteric definition only you know

>>17821913
>orthodox gnosticism
you first.

>>17821919

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism

>>17821943
>wikipedia articles
retard

>>17821811
Retroactively refuted by Plotinus

>>17821806
"your christianity"

>>17820270
btw frog posters will never achieve knowledge, it takes one digit IQ to post this degenerate frog. and all your isms are just masks to hide your own stupidity.

>>17820562
<18

>>17820441
>>17820270
This, alternatively, investigate Christianity as a vessel for Hellenic pagan ideas/Hermeticism until you come back round to it

>>17821781
>evil perfects its power to capture and imprison light.
there just isn’t a rational basis for this. at least emanationism can be thought of in and made compatible with thomism
> I can't be deceived about the nature of love or goodness, anymore than descartes can be deceived about the fact of his own existence, even if it is the condition of a pervasive, ontological deception.
i can agree to that, but how do you know you can escape, let alone confirm that existence is incompatible with what is good.
>there is a love that is demiurge compliant (charity that prolongs and teases out suffering, for example)
i can’t imagine how this is in any semblance ‘good’ as it is evil. if the evil is trapping souls of light in darkness, then sustaining trapped souls is also evil, not good
>marcion's great innovation was to posit a Good higher than good. if i am being deceived about the nature of this Good, then I can posit another one rung up the ladder. at every point I am doing justice to an ethical intuition that emanationist schemes don't.
i’ll have to familiarize myself more with the idea before i reply to it.
> i don't see the anti-god as a cliff edge that threatens to cut off the outflow of divine energies, i see it as a counter-condition, positive, actively hostile to the source. a God whose every immanent possibility includes evil is not God, it's just a singularity hemorrhaging into manifestation without care.
i don’t see evil as contained by God per my definition of what evil is (absence of good). with that said, i also don’t see evil as passive. evil can manifest actively/positively through consciousness, as i assume we both view free will as a necessary, good, and apparent cosmological axiom. if beings have the choice between good and evil, then this is simply saying they have the choice to move towards or away from God - towards pure being or non-being. lucifer is an example of active evil against God among the numerous actors and personas describing evil.

>>17820718
>i see the world as a parasite or vampire feeding on a primordial light source
Absolute reality is limitless and cannot be exhausted, stolen from, tainted, divided, or anything like these. Gnosticism is like taking a few ideas from Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism, misinterpreting them, missing the bigger picture, reifying dualisms, adding one's own negative egoic projections and delusions, and making it's own religion out of it. The Gnostic interpretation of what is primordial and absolute is too shallow, not ambitious enough, too much like a character and without a necessary vastness - a true vastness which leads one into a non-dual interpretation of the absolute.

An ontology that takes dualism to be fully and completely real in the ultimate view of reality is based on a misunderstanding of the nature of duality. It would be a mistake to say that things do not exist at all, and this would also be a misunderstand of non-duality. Duality arises perfectly well within a non-dual framework, and in fact it cannot possibly be any other way. The largest roadblock to understanding our reality is taking human conceptions completely seriously. Conception is extremely beneficial, but it obscures the light of pre-conceptual truth, which is another name for non-dual truth.

>>17823240
i dont think compatibility with thomism is anything to be proud of. if there is no escape, then i'll go down cursing the beast with every cell in my body.

>>17823818
no, i told you this, I'm talking about dualism, not duality, it's a distinction already made and recognized. non-dualism is a sick lie when its propagated in service of the evolutionary program of the universe. you're placid serene sweet absolute is a world-eating darkness. evil is NOT good, good is NOT evil, the world is something to be ALIENATED from, not embraced. the rest of your post is the usual monistic droning

>>17823874
>i told you this
Not to me
>you're placid serene sweet absolute
Again, this is the small view of the absolute, not the vast one. The absolute is not placid but achieves everything. To me its the Gnostic absolute that is placid, serene and sweet, especially if it can be seen as a helpless victim of a parasite.
>evil is NOT good, good is NOT evil
Correct, and there is no problem with the existence of duality if you really understand non-duality. It is important to say that one can have non-duality that is not exactly monism. As I said, it is possible that good is good and evil is evil, and good is not evil and evil is not good, while both are subsumed into one limitless primordiality. It is not the typical human common-sense thinking, but we shouldn't cling to such an ignorant view like that.

Duality is true and non-duality is true, and that is the real non-duality. Monism, which denies duality, is itself a kind of duality, which is obviously self-defeating. However, stopping at the truth of duality will never show you how things really are. Things-in-themselves are infinite. Your concepts of things are not fully real and not fully unreal. Good and evil are separate, but they both exist as appearances within the absolute.

>>17823874
the world is dualistic
non-duality doesn't pertain to material you mongol

>>17820270
Translation:

>Any books for those who struggle with their christian faith because of lack of selfcertainty?

Selfcertainty, and faith, are mutually complementary; if you ignore your own nobility (derived from root: -gno) —the essence of your soul—, and, by extension, that of others, rather than build, and construct, your life from it, you will always remain in ignorance of God.

>>17822027
At least present your source before you try and call people names. You look pathetic. I know there is no point in arguing with someone like you but I'm honestly bored

>>17825490
>nobility (derived from root: -gno)
where can i find about it? i tried to look for it but found nothing.

>>17825547
It is obtained from inference, not from any particular reference.

>>17825637
what do you mean? you mean you made up what something means?

>>17825669
Inference entails —via intuition, and logic— synthesis of mutually cognate things, not "making things up".

>>17825279
Reifying material as nothing more than material is your problem. Material is a fabrication of what is non-material, so is material simply material? No. Materiality is an appearance. Yes, non-duality does pertain to the material.

>>17825738
there is no material when in union with God

>>17825734
ok so can you explain how nobility is inferred from gno-?

>>17820549
You seem upset.

>>17820270
Of the ideas don’t produce power, that is, action in good moral standing then those ideas are completely useless to you. Christianity is the final redpill because going and doing good for your fellow man is the message. It’s a directive that holds far more power than a lot of different ideologies and dogmas.

>>17820270
I find it hard because I consider myself Christian and Gnostic. Samael rules this plane and is the old testament god, but Christ is descended from the original God and tries to get us to ascend through love. Also believe in reincarnation

>>17825762
The Protoindoeuropean root: "gno-", means: "to know"; "gnosis" means: "(divine/higher/mystical) knowledge"; "noble" is derived from latin: "gnobilis"; gnosticism is the theological modality, and means to ontic fullness, that is exclusive to the noble person; one can infer from all of the aforementioned that: "nobility" ("gnobilitas"), and: "gnosis"/"gnosticism", are mutually cognate, being derived from etymological root: "gno-".

>>17825762
The Protoindoeuropean root: "gno-", means: "to know"; "gnosis" means: "(divine/higher/mystical) knowledge"; "noble" is derived from Latin: "gnobilis"; gnosticism is the theological modality, and means to ontic fullness, that is exclusive to the noble person; one can infer from all of the aforementioned that: "nobility" ("gnobilitas"), and: "gnosis"/"gnosticism", are mutually cognate, being derived from etymological root: "gno-".

>>17822458
>Christ freeing the little children from globohomo cuck muzzles
Based. I love Jesus.

>>17824147
Where can I read more of that? Very interesting, if I understood correctly

>>17820270
Read Paul's Epistles and get back to me, bro. Make sure it's KJV as well.

>>17821344
The jews got corrupted by paganfags when they wrote the Septuagint and the vatican fathers also made the same mistake. Is it any wonder why so many catholics get confused and start chasing wandering spirits?

>>17826330
No, monotheism just attracts fags like you, and no one wants to be associated with that. Of course they’ll prefer a dynamic and virile wargod over the god of whiny, sighing and womanly character like you, that should be a no-brainer

>>17820270
Cyril O'Regan is currently writing a series on gnosticism. 2 volumes are published and 2 more are planned. 3rd volume will be on German Idealism (such as Hegel, Schelling, Fichte); 4th will be on Romanticism (Blake, Holderlin, Novalis).
Gnostic Return in Modernity
Gnostic Apocalypse: Jacob Boehme's Haunted Narrative

>>17825759
That is exactly my point. In union with the divine material appears as something which has never truly existed, appeared in a ghost-like form, but never as existed like the divine has.

>>17826359
Who's Cyril O'Reagan

>>17826342
So you want a war god who only spreads destruction and death like a subhman savage? I would rather worship the Living God that created the entire universe and was willing to shed his Blood for my sins.

Any incel with a gun can kill, but it takes a real man to die for his friends and ultimately defeat death itself.

>>17826416
God, you sound like such a fucking woman. Whining, sighing and nagging until you get everything your way. I bet when you read the Bible, you’re moved, like a homo

>>17826401
He's a theology professor at the Notre Dame. His writes mostly on the theology-side of Hegel, gnosticism, memory, and the apocalypse.

>>17826424
>OMG you sound like SUCH a WOMAN!
You're the one getting your panties in a twist over a faith that you apparently are better than, yet can't keep out of your head.

I on the other hand have remained stoic and straightforward in stating the facts, whereas you just go for emotionally driven ad hominems. I honestly feel bad for you and I extend my deepest sympathies for your tortured conscience. Does that bother you? Deal with it. Weak men are hurt by love but if you take enough cough medicine, perhaps you'll learn to be comfortable with yourself one day.

>>17820270
stop wasting your time with this nonsense and read nonfiction. If god made the world, we can learn about god best by learning about the natural world.

>>17826491
>You're the one getting your panties in a twist over a faith that you apparently are better than, yet can't keep out of your head.
Your first commandment is quite literally about how much your whiny god can’t stand anyone besides him. Talk about something living rent-free in someone’s head.

Also, your idea of how a man acts is hilariously stereotypical. Like you think man are supposed to be stoic robots or something, I mean holy shit, it sure shows how everything in your mind is just tainted with stereotypes. Then again, that isn’t too strange, since exaggeration and hyperbole are typical hysterical traits. This doesn’t really surprise me, since Christianity is easily the most homosexual religion ever devised. Everything in Christianity is about being whiny and bitchy, endlessly obsessing over past transgressions and never just forgetting them. It’s also obsessed with dramawhoring, and then calling it ‘persecution’ when people finally had enough of your shit, again exactly how a sassy gay man acts

>>17826504
How do you determine the causes of the natural world, though? Human ingenuity can only take us so far.

Job 38:1-41
>(1) Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said,
>(2) Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?
>(3) Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.
>(4) Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
>(5) Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
>(6) Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
>(7) When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
>(8) Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb?
>(9) When I made the cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a swaddlingband for it,
>(10) And brake up for it my decreed place, and set bars and doors,
>(11) And said, Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further: and here shall thy proud waves be stayed?
>(12) Hast thou commanded the morning since thy days; and caused the dayspring to know his place;
>(13) That it might take hold of the ends of the earth, that the wicked might be shaken out of it?
>(14) It is turned as clay to the seal; and they stand as a garment.
>(15) And from the wicked their light is withholden, and the high arm shall be broken.

>>17826533
>How do you determine the causes of the natural world, though?
Certainly not by just giving up and saying a wizard who wants to cut off a part of your penis did it

>>17826520
>he doesn't Rightly Divide
>he hasn't read Paul
All of your points are measurably wrong and you are definitely up past your bedtime. Stop projecting your sexual confusion to strangers on the internet and seething for days about a topic that you're not even qualified to be an amateur in.

>>17826539
Well it's a good thing they didn't do that, unlike modern scientists and doctors who are treated like literal wizards who can conjure magic vaccines and perform "medical" circumcisions

But do go on about how you're immune to propaganda.

>>17826548
I don’t care about a hysterical bitch like Paul. He was abnormal and a historical anomaly, whose heritage will slowly fade away, because it’s ultimately devoid of anything valuable

>>17826555
>being unironically antivaxx
I knew religiontards were dummies but holy shit, you went all the way. Way to be sincerely retarded, I guess

>>17826567
You seem to be going through some kind of derogatory, downward spiral. Do you need a hug?

I'll hug you

>>17826574
I’m not going ‘through’ anything. Again, this armchair psychology is another good example of the bitchy nature of Christianity. If it were a person, Christianity would be a bitchy and spoiled housewife, and you personify this to near perfection

>>17826571
It's not even a vaccine. You would know that if you had any scientific knowledge of the subject matter, but you only spam profanities and make no case for your intelligence. Why would listen to you for medical advice? Do you even double-triple mask, bro? Science says so. Don't you trust SCIENCE?

>>17826587
>he keeps cursing and complaining about nothing in particular
I will rape you with my love

>>17826533
the natural world encompasses everything that ever was and ever will be. Western civilization succeeded because unlike others which held the true nature of reality to be found by reading a holy book (islam), western thought looked upon his creation and empiricism resulted in the total dominance of the western way

>>17826588
Then enlighten me, o mighty sage. Wow me with your totally not outdated Aristotelean wisdom, on how the wrong kinds of fucking started the virus and we don’t need a vaccine, we need the vacc-sin, from Jaysus

>>17826595
>the natural world encompasses everything that ever was and ever will be.
How do you know? You don't even know how big the universe truly is, nevermind how it was made or maintained.
>Western civilization succeeded because unlike others which held the true nature of reality to be found by reading a holy book (islam),
Non western civilizations were more advanced than the west earlier and well before the koran, so I fail to see your point.
>western thought looked upon his creation and empiricism resulted in the total dominance of the western way
Based on things written in "holy books" of philosophy and science, which don't actually make our lives better, just easier. We get fatter and this modern world is slowly killing us, but we have to carry on to reach some onions-soaked Star Trek utopia of blasting off amongst the stars on the Icarian wings of human intellect, which is really just a power fantasy of nerds who wish they could "think" their way into power.

The West is dying because it has been foolishly proud of itself from day 1.

>>17826621
If you back down from your neotenous sarcasm and vulgarities, perhaps I'll treat you like an adult and approach our conversation with good faith.

>>17826644
Maybe you should start with not using 5 dollar words you found in a thesaurus, I’d probably be inclined to actually listen

>>17826651
Sorry, do big words intimidate you? Though I'm actually impressed that you constructed a sentence without using coarse language, well done.

You see my friend, I read books. I don't need to memorize words in a thesaurus since I don't believe in dinosaurs. Bahaha, a bit of the old humor, my good man, to lighten up the mood, as it were.

I fear at this point however that we may be entering into a stalemate of shitposting that will only wind up wasting both of our time, so unless you actually want to be serious and engage in a stimulating conversation, I'll probably just trail off and continue my study of Larkin before hitting the hay.

In any which case, no malintents were meant in my witticisms and I sincerely wish you the jolliest of evenings, brother :)

>>17826633
all I'm saying is we should learn about the world by interacting with it. "thinking really hard" has it's place, but this kind of inwardness in limiting. Empiricism can be a rewarding process in itself, to uncover mysteries and gain understanding.

>>17826651
>>17826651
>wahhh big words
out of every board you could embarass yourself in, you choose lit..?

>>17825279
then you have a higher-order dualism between a non-dual light and a dualistic world. you can't escape it.

>>17825832
Gnosticism: "just make some shit up dawg"

>>17820270
i got the exact opisite thing. coming from plato, gnosticism felt like obfuscationism.

>>17820325
solving the problem of evil, by not recognizing evil as such, is incredibly debased

>>17828289
plato was an acolyte of the demiurge

I'm considering the possibility that the discovery of the Nag Hammadi codices was the second coming of Christ.

>>17827414
what do you think about non-dual light and a non-dual world? the Knower as eternally unchanging, the Known as eternally changing?

>>17828478
and would these actually constitute a dualism, given that they do not relate to one another at all? or do they relate, specifically in human beings?