/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.21490180]

Which way, /lit/ man?

[Anonymous No.21490191]

>>21490180
you don't really believe in something unless you're willing to die for it

[Anonymous No.21490200]

>berturd russell
>died anyway
lmao what a loser

[Anonymous No.21490213]

Now that the dust has settled, who was right here?

>When you come to look into this argument from design, it is a most astonishing thing that people can believe that this world, with all the things that are in it, with all its defects, should be the best that omnipotence and omniscience has been able to produce in millions of years. I really cannot believe it. Do you think that, if you were granted omnipotence and omniscience and millions of years in which to perfect your world, you could produce nothing better than the Ku-Klux-Klan or the Fascists?

-Bertram Russell, “Why I am Not a Christian”

>To the believer in Islam, human power falls into two categories: a rightly-guided power that recognizes God and abides by His directions, and an arrogant, rebellious one that does not admit to God’s sovereignty and authority. A Muslim is required to support and endorse the former, no matter how weak or disadvantaged it may be, and to reject and oppose the latter, regardless of its strength or dominance. The Qur’ān says: “Many a small band, by the grace of God, has vanquished a large one.” (2: 249) Such victory of the apparently weaker host could only be achieved when it relies on God, the source of all power.

-Sayyid Qutb, Under the Shade of the Quran

[Anonymous No.21490215]

>>21490213
>you could produce nothing better than the Ku-Klux-Klan or the Fascists?
based midwit

[Anonymous No.21490221]

>"The American is primitive in his artistic taste, both in what he enjoys as art and in his own artistic works. "Jazz" music is his music of choice. This is that music that the Negroes invented to satisfy their primitive inclinations, as well as their desire to be noisy on the one hand and to excite bestial tendencies on the other. The American's intoxication in "jazz" music does not reach its full completion until the music is accompanied by singing that is just as coarse and obnoxious as the music itself. Meanwhile, the noise of the instruments and the voices mounts, and it rings in the ears to an unbearable degree… The agitation of the multitude increases, and the voices of approval mount, and their palms ring out in vehement, continuous applause that all but deafens the ears".[44]
kek
It’s Qutb for me

[Anonymous No.21490223]

>>21490213
Russell is arguing against a straw man because Christians don't make the assertion that God must necessarily create a universe with the absence of what Russell considers mistakes or bad things.

[Anonymous No.21490226]

>>21490180
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOa--Dhu11M

[Anonymous No.21490230]

>>21490180
Telling people that dying for their beliefs is right is pretty convenient when you want you followers to... die for their beliefs.
It's like those stupid moralizing speeches FDR gave. Pretty convenient when you just want to send your man to die for international capital and jews.

No I won't die for my beliefs. Not because I might be wrong, but because the person telling me to do it is certainly trying to advance their own agenda.
Niggers.

[Anonymous No.21490251]

>>21490230
Qutb said that after he refused to recant his beliefs, being told if he recanted, he would be pardoned, but if not, he would be put to death. He chose death. His sister came to his cell begging him to just recant and that is where this statement is front, he said it to her

[Anonymous No.21490255]

>>21490213
Russell. A religious person will always resort to a religious text as the final evidence of their position, which castrated debate to one of textual semantics, of which the religious have been fastidiously refining for thousands of years.

Take, for example, the quote in thus rebuttal. If you remove by the grace of God from the sentence it still applies true. However, you can also say that large armies under the banner of God have also been vanquished.

The religious leave the contrary hanging almost as if it is a trap to ensnare the non-believers, and drag them into the never-ending semantic death spiral until submission

[Anonymous No.21490412]

>>21490180
Russell reflects late stage last man mentality with that quote. But Qutb reflects a very fanaticist brand of subjectivism ironically based on outward forms imposed on him (and all Muslims), which is contrary to true subjective authenticity. So they're both actually pretty bad, pretty opposed to true individuality, both slaves to something else. For Russell per the quote, it's a kind of security and timidity. For Qutb, who has the form right but not the content, it's something outside himself that he presupposes true simply out of herd mentality (Islam in his case) and which leads him and other Qutbists into a lot of ressentiment (for example, against the west) and acts of violence that are born of that.

[Anonymous No.21490421]

>>21490180
2nd guy. The 1st guy is a spineless cuck.

[Anonymous No.21490428]

>>21490251
Ok, fair enough.
You semites should learn a thing or two about dettachment.

[Anonymous No.21490451]

>>21490230
>No I won't die for my beliefs. Not because I might be wrong, but because the person telling me to do it is certainly trying to advance their own agenda.
that's called dying for someone elses beliefs you fucking idiot

[Anonymous No.21490453]

>>21490412
If I understand you correctly, you’re saying authenticity is contingent upon liberalism, yes? However I disagree, i believe liberalism is just really good at simulating authenticity in order to anesthesize angst

[Anonymous No.21490460]

>>21490453
>If I understand you correctly, you’re saying authenticity is contingent upon liberalism, yes?
that isn't what he said

[Anonymous No.21490466]

>>21490460
Yes he said because Qutb was a religious conservative (fanatic, as he put it), he precludes authenticity

[Anonymous No.21490467]

>>21490180
nothing i have written won't be so twisted by ambiguity that its interpretation could possibly match its intent. therefore, my words are not relevant. Also, Russell is a coward.

[Anonymous No.21490499]

holy shit atheists are unbearable. god truly is great. if i had the power id probably be unable to resist exploding the living body of this chinless faggot before he even finished this sentence.

[Anonymous No.21490625]

>>21490180
>>21490213
>>21490200
Bertrand Russell, the original Redditor.

[Anonymous No.21490645]

>>21490221
>he said, amidst the children and goats he fucks in his desert hut, and being perfectly incapable of playing or writing Jazz
That quote settled it for me. OP, you've chosen to have a battle between to idiots, rendering the results unimportant.

[Anonymous No.21490647]

>>21490230
Flaccid coward - typical racist really.

[Anonymous No.21490651]

>>21490499
based dubs of truth

[Anonymous No.21490657]

>>21490221
>he said, amidst the children and goats he fucks in his desert hut, and being perfectly incapable of playing or writing Jazz
That quote settled it for me. OP, you've chosen to have a battle between two idiots, rendering the results unimportant.

[Anonymous No.21490667]

>>21490657
Qutb was in America to teach, he was actually a well educated in literature. One of his major criticisms of America is that he said their cultural pillars, classicalism and the Bible, were totally foreign to them so they had no sense of either their religious or secular cultural inheritance

[Anonymous No.21490687]

>>21490647
Go die for Israel, then, if you love them so much lol

[Anonymous No.21490734]

>>21490200
Russell lived until 97 years old which refutes your point and being radicalized to die for "le beliefs" would have meant a life a fraction of this. Also he would still be alive today if he had began taking selegiline and epithalon in his 30s (assuming they existed then) and maintaining a regular cadence of intermittent fasting. Dying is a choice. Low body fat and pipe tobacco smoking got him that far. Instead of getting mad and seething about the world, why don't you focus on yourself.

[Anonymous No.21490736]

>>21490687
>the only available belief is zionism
your demoralization is complete.

[Anonymous No.21490741]

>>21490734
This post made Mishima sad

[Anonymous No.21490745]

>>21490734
>refutes your point
still died and gone down in history as peak redditor and anglo

[Anonymous No.21490754]

beliefs are spooks

[Anonymous No.21490762]

>>21490180
He might be clinically retarded, but BAP had a point.

[Anonymous No.21490801]

>>21490453
>>21490466
I actually almost used the term liberalism to specify in what sense Russell is a late stage last man. So no, the problem with Qutb isn't liberalism.
>However I disagree, i believe liberalism is just really good at simulating authenticity in order to anesthesize angst
So I agree with this, but I don't think that means Qutb is right because of this. Qutb is still inauthentic. I made it clear the issue with Qutb isn't the form but the content. From the perspective of someone being very first-personally zealous and revolting against western trends, Qutb will look authentic. That's why i said the issue with Qutb isn't form, but content. The reason he's not authentic is that he's actually as much relying on the herd as the same liberal westerners he critiques, and Russell exemplifies that well. So the other anon, aka >>21490460 is right, you misunderstood what I said. Maybe it helps to say that liberalism pretends to be individualist, but ultimately tends to be very anti-individualist. For example, talk of "rights" and "equality" and their continued reliance on traditional morality is too generalist. True individualism has to be more particularist. But Qutb's ressentiment would be pernicious, even if Qutb dropped the Islam and became a particularist. What's fanatical about Qutb isn't the religion, it's the ressentiment part and how it leads Qutb and Qutbists to things like dee[;y hating the west in a toxic, festering, and unhealthy way, up to and including acts of terrorism.

[Anonymous No.21491246]

>>21490801
This is correct. Qutb is more interested in the ideology akin to Ibn Taymiyyah (tradition is an innovation and all Muslims can use their own fitrah) which is an individualistic and thus subversive idea that seeks to break down tradition itself rather than true protection of tradition. His analysis of the West is correct but his approach is as modern as the west itself.

[Anonymous No.21491251]

>>21490213
Russell is based

[Anonymous No.21491267]

>>21490180
Russell wanted to commit suicide because he thought prinipia mathematica project was so important but he just can't progress his brain power fast enough

[Anonymous No.21491274]

>>21490180
Bottom one is a nigger and promotes niggered values, corrupting and violent, founded in societies of polygamy, leading to a scarcities of women, leading to culturally fueled generalized involuntary celibate violence, and a rationalizing of that violence, ultimately to have managed to persist to modernity without shaking that depravity and havve the privilege of being identified in the same space as a member of civilized society. I hate darkies so much it is unreal.

[Anonymous No.21491291]

>>21490734
>Russell lived until 97
He existed for 97 years, but I doubt he ever lived.

[Anonymous No.21491348]

>>21490412
>reflects late stage last man mentality
So what. There's no such thing as a "last man". It's a delusion that exists in your head.

[Anonymous No.21491525]

>>21490180
When I was looking at the OP pic from the catalogue I assumed that the guy at the bottom was reviewbrah. Would've still picked him over Russel. Soulless midwit.

[Anonymous No.21491568]

Russell is your perfect 100 IQ man, substituting ideology with smugness and contrarianism.
This Qutb is likely no higher than 100 either, but at least he is more romantic.

[Anonymous No.21491625]

>>21490180
>>21490213
Westerner humbly and sincerely inquiring for truth vs boasting Arab wanking over empty power fantasies

[Anonymous No.21491665]

>>21490801
I think now you’re just throwing word around because “inauthentic” isn’t actually a philosophical term (the closest is “bad faith” as coined by Sartre). I am not sure you know what authenticity means in philosophy, it’s a translation of Eigentlichkeit, which means means to own one self. That is, to own up to your actions and accept their consequences. An individual human is not authentic or inauthentic because inauthentic doesn’t actually correspond to any German word! Authenticity is a temporary occurrence when you run into a decision triggering angst: do you step outside the normal running of things, often with serious consequences, to no one longer be “one simply does” as in one goes to work one eats one sleeps etc, or do you say as one, “Das Man”. Objectively by philosophy, Qutb opted for authenticity because one does not simply get to one death for one’s beliefs. That is not what Das Man does. To choose that is Eigentlichkeit. Das Man goes to work. Das Man brushes his teeth. Das Man sleep. Das Man goes shopping. Das Man does not however take death over recanting

>>21491246
Ibn Taymiyyah never, ever says this, it is a strawman Abdul Hakim Murad concocted about him. If you want to actually engage with Ibn Taymiyyah’s beliefs I recommend you check out Ibn Taymiyyah Expounds on Islam. Ibn Taymiyyah is is true strongly opposed Ash’aris, which AHM is, but he never opposed tradition; rather he was known for being a strict advocate of tradition (Athar) against innovation (bid’ah). But he triggers Ash’aris because he disagrees with al-Ghazali he opposed divine command theory (believing Shari’ah is mostly natural law, such as the ruling against homosexuality with a smaller portion pragmatic law given by Allah, such as the ruling against alcohol, and an even smaller portion injunctions with no innate benefit but to test obedience, and the example he uses here is Abraham being ordered to sacrifice his son) and he disagreed with ocassionalism (believing in efficient causation).

[Anonymous No.21491684]

>>21490213
Neither, but Qutebee is correct in the OP

[Anonymous No.21491785]

>>21490180
>>21490213
Russell is right

[Anonymous No.21491816]

>>21491665
Have you read Nietzsche? I can rephrase everything I said and drop the word "authentic" and the word "inauthentic" because the word being chosen doesn't matter in making the Nietzschean points I was making about last men, ressentiment, the herd, individuality, subjectivity, etc. There's no need to pontificate Heideggerian concepts like das Man to me in such an embarrassing way that misses the point and content of what I said. Are you some kind of Qutbist? Was Qutb a reader of Heidegger? Maybe that would explain your angle, I don't know, feel free to explain it to me. But to me it seems to me like you think you know philosophy but I don't think you know enough about it.
>Das Man does not however take death over recanting
Even by Heideggerian lights I think you're misunderstanding das Man because for Heidegger, being drawn out of das Man is supposed to be rooted in the very anxiety brought about through confronting death, the possibility of impossibility. Heidegger suggests that belief in an afterlife is one of the ways people sedate each other into staying within the mode of das Man rather than getting out of it. More generally, any attempt to make you feel comfortable with death rather than feeling anxious about it is a tactic meant to keep you in das Man. He's pretty clear about this. Qutb, a Muslim who believes dogmatically in an afterlife of rewards for martyrdom, cannot be authentically being-towards-death by Heidegger's own lights. But as I said, I wasn't even beign Heideggerian. My criticism of Qutb is Nietzschean, and I could say more about this but in a way I already have, I think you should study Nietzsche if it didn't seem obvious at first what I was saying.

[Anonymous No.21491826]

>>21490191
Why is that?

[Anonymous No.21491843]

>>21491816
Yes, I have read Nietzsche, many works by Nietzsche. Nietzsche did not believe imposing your beliefs was “inauthentic”, rather he saw values as being established by being imposed and striving to impose your values on others not as something problematic as you suggest

Heidegger doesn’t suggest that. He doesn’t think Das Man is something you need to “get out of” rather than it is everyday life and part of functioning society. Stepping out of it is only a possibility at particular junctures when one must consciously do so, a very uncomfortable ordeal, or not

The point about anxiety toward death is the finititude and thus decisiveness of life. Certainly Qutb and Kierkegaard (whom it seems you are vaguely appealing to more than Nietzsche when you complain Qutb wanted a theocracy) considered time very precious. They didn’t see it as an infinite resource because when you die there is just more. Rather Qutb empathetic stressed this life is a ticking clock given as a test for what we do with it, and once you die everything is tallied up. You are brought to be judged for what you did with your time. If anything sincere belief here establishes more anxiety than simply thinking your being is terminated. And of course for Kierkegaard the very sedateness you are talking about is what is incompatible with Christianity which demands decision and accountability for yourself

[Anonymous No.21491845]

>>21491665
I am not bashing Ibn Taymiyyah, and he is a nuanced genius with due complexity in his ideas and I am not talking specifically about his metaphysics. I am interesting in his disregard for the consensus. You cannot deny at the essence of this, as taken by the illiterate masses is the denial of tradition that culminates in the ulama or their own urf. Sure, the urf untouched by The Lord will need cleansing but what is clasified as permissible or not permissible, I am more aligned to the Shafi’is. How about a culture that expresses their spirituality with music? The position of the Hanbalite Atharis is usually to completely get rid of it. I think this is not conducive to dakwah and frankly abet prejudice when in Shariah as a whole there are ways to accomodate it. The same goes for creating fiction or poetry. I swear I had seen Hanbalite Atharis giving fatwa about the impermissibility of Poetry and Fiction.

I am sure you know more about Ibn Taymiyyah than I do, but I see the effects the people who are influenced by his ideas had made in terms of giving dakwah, and I simply think it will never work nor will it produce anything beautiful unless we roll back and take Ibn Taymiyyah in full along with his participation in Tariqas and nuance.

[Anonymous No.21491885]

>>21491845
*cough cough* let’s get one thing straight. “Consensus” in Islam as a technical terms means ijma. It means *unanimous opinion* according to ash-Shafi’i it means of ALL Muslims. This is almost nonexistent except for the first generation. The main source of ijma for Ibn Taymiyyah was Ibn Hazm, who collated by careful research every point of the religion which the first generation agreed upon unanimously. When it comes to these points, Ibn Taymiyyah never dissents.

Imam Shafi’i’s principles of jurisprudence, his methodology, is laid out completely in the Risala of Shafi’i and he does *not* permit local culture (‘urf) as a basis for rulings. His opinion is that religion comes exclusively from revelation. In fact his Risala is highly esteemed by Salafis, possibly too esteemed. But anyway, it is ironic that Ibn Hazm (who also discounted culture as a basis for rulings) has the only consistent fiqh which works to permit music (what you’re talking about, being sloppy about prohibitions to accommodate culture makes no sense or it would have done with Arab culture which it was not), because Zahiris are considered almost heretical by everyone except Salafis and Hanbalis, since Zahiris reject qiyas

No Hanbali Athari says poetry or fiction is haram. Even the salafi fatwa site IslamQA says writing fiction for a living is permissible

[Anonymous No.21491938]

>>21490230
Demoralisation: the post.

[Anonymous No.21491941]

>>21490213
>>When you come to look into this argument from design, it is a most astonishing thing that people can believe that this world, with all the things that are in it, with all its defects, should be the best that omnipotence and omniscience has been able to produce in millions of years. I really cannot believe it. Do you think that, if you were granted omnipotence and omniscience and millions of years in which to perfect your world, you could produce nothing better than the Ku-Klux-Klan or the Fascists?

Actually, yes. Omnipotence and omniscience are Evil.

[Anonymous No.21491956]

>>21491885
>No Hanbali Athari says poetry or fiction is haram. Even the salafi fatwa site IslamQA says writing fiction for a living is permissible
There indeed has been. I am a writer and had scrambled for fatwa for the permissibility of what I do after my awakening and indeed I found fatwa cited the prohibition of Fiction. You don’t even need to dig deep, and I am positive you could find it.

I appreciate your points however, clearly more learned than I. However, in the pursuit of dakwah, one will have to accomodate the culture as long as they fall within the acceptable range of the Shariah. This is the constant with successful dakwah by the Sufis. I simply cannot see a Hambalite Athari or Salafi converting the whole of the Nusantara and the Balkans to the religion of Islam. Can you perhaps elaborate on this?

[Anonymous No.21491970]

>>21491956
Salafi methodology requires specific proof that something is haram for it to be haram. Rather we have proof that fiction is permissible based on Allah himself using it several times such as 2:17 and 2:19

Salafis did not have any state funding their efforts of proselytizing until the 20th Century whereas Sufis had an extremely powerful empire giving them funds and political support.

[Anonymous No.21491999]

The second one rarely happens

[Anonymous No.21492266]

>>21491999
It depends, if your words are recorded or publicized then definitely getting killed for them often gives them much more serious influence. Or, as the Unabomber found out, killing for them can sometimes accomplish the same thing

[Anonymous No.21492278]

>>21490180
Went to Russel's house for tea once and my friend Juuso was a little tipsy, he grabbed Russel's teapot and just threw it so hard it flew out the window and straight into orbit

[Anonymous No.21492281]

>>21490734
>refuted
You have to be 18 years old to post here since you clearly do not know what refute means.

[Anonymous No.21492456]

>>21491956
I thought this too, but the fatwas making fiction impermissible are actually not fiction but fantasy and science fiction this can be seen in https://www.google.com/amp/s/islamqa.info/amp/en/answers/6044
The writer seems to hate fiction here but the answer is for fantasy as the question is asked relating to fantasy, the writer here might not be hard line but just giving advice to people who read fantasy by saying that historical fiction in a sense is a type of fantasy to engage in. Of course if the question was if fiction was impermissible the answer would be different.
>>21491885
Jazakallah khayran thank you for sharing your knowledge it clarified the fatwas on islamqa.

[Anonymous No.21492463]

>>21490734
>Dying is a choice.
Far too based for this board

[Anonymous No.21492479]

>>21492456
Same site permits it
https://islamqa.info/amp/en/answers/331090

Fiqh distinguishes fiction from lying based on the points I mentioned from Quran.

وإياكم

[Anonymous No.21492493]

>>21490213
>Do you think that, if you were granted omnipotence and omniscience and millions of years in which to perfect your world, you could produce nothing better than the Ku-Klux-Klan or the Fascists?
:^)

[Anonymous No.21492547]

>>21490191
>>21491826
NTA
"Believe" in this context is something greater than accepting something simply because there is more evidence in favor of it than against. Most things are not "believed in" but "believed" in the vulgar sense. Bertrand Russel is the peak of disgusting redditors, because either he really believes in nothing worth dying for, or he is a lying hypocritical faggot. Nearly every redditor likes to quote pithy, trite garbage such as what Russel generally piukes forth, but most of them would indeed die for some belief; typically, whatever gives them the social warm-fuzzies in their little tummies. I would assume Bertrand and his legion of midwits would choke themselves dead on the boot of liberalism if it meant defending the rights of women to change the color of their hair; they don't really need evidence to "prove" that it is right. They simple "believe in" the ideals of liberalism.

But if a redditor doesn't really believe in what he espouses so strongly, be it feminism, liberalism, nihilism, or communism- and he doesn't care enough about it to die for what he believes- then what he believes is utterly inconsequential and he has no right to open his faggot-maw and babble on about his disgusting vomit. Beliefs are, at the very least, proven to be of consequence when the one who espouses it is willing to defend it with his life. It is not worth his life, it is not even worth believing. It is in the realm of other inconsequential beliefs like whether the chicken in my KFC is really turkey, or whether Redbull is made of piss.

[Anonymous No.21492667]

>>21490180
russell was a certified retard. If he lived today, he would be a simplistic atheist youtuber like cosmicskeptic

[Anonymous No.21492848]

>>21490734
Imagine being this afraid of death lmao

[Anonymous No.21492933]

>>21491941
>Actually, yes. Omnipotence and omniscience are Evil.
Found the Calvinist

[Anonymous No.21492936]

>>21492667
It’s a shame to see Russell reduced to his worst work, but so guess that’s what you get when you make that sort of pop philosophy.

[Anonymous No.21492951]

Has anyone been able to rebut Bertrand Russell's famous reason-based ethical argument in “Marriage and Morals”?

>Love as a relation between men and women was ruined by the desire to make sure of the legitimacy of children.

>The psychology of adultery has been falsified by conventional morals, which assume, in monogamous countries, that attraction to one person cannot coexist with a serious affection for another. Everybody knows that this is untrue.

>Even in civilised mankind faint traces of a monogamic instinct can sometimes be perceived.

>I should not hold it desirable that either a man or a woman should enter upon the serious business of a marriage intended to lead to children without having had previous sexual experience.

>Science enables us to realise our purposes, and if our purposes are evil, the result is disaster.

>Joy of life... depends upon a certain spontaneity in regard to sex. Where sex is repressed, only work remains, and a gospel of work for work's sake never produced any work worth doing.

>Gluttony is regarded by the Catholic Church as one of the seven deadly sins, and those who practise it are placed by Dante in one of the deeper circles of hell; but it is a somewhat vague sin, since it is hard to say where a legitimate interest in food ceases and guilt begins to be incurred. Is it wicked to eat anything that is not nourishing? If so, with every salted almond we risk damnation.

Russell's father allowed Russell's mother to sleep with Russell's tutor, and Bertrand Russell grew up to be a genius and win the Nobel Peace Prize.

[Anonymous No.21492960]

>>21492951
>Russell's father allowed Russell's mother to sleep with Russell's tutor, and Bertrand Russell grew up to be a genius and win the Nobel Peace Prize
He grew up to be a reddit søyboy. Would have done well to work in the coal mines.

[Anonymous No.21492967]

>>21492951
He won the Nobel prize for literature, not peace.

[Anonymous No.21492973]

>>21492951
I don't think there's much to rebut, he just states his values.

[Anonymous No.21492996]

>>21492667
How many of those YouTubers are platonist panpsychists? I cannot imagine any of them approaching metaphysics in the same way Russell did.

[Anonymous No.21493003]

>>21492667
Why do you hate CosmicSkeptic? He seems alright and actually has a theology degree.

[Anonymous No.21493008]

>>21492960
Coal indeed

[Anonymous No.21493033]

>>21492547
Nice wot but apart from a convoluted attack to Russell you haven't told me why I should be ready to give my life for something I believe in, and willing to die for a reason like this only means you're so stubborn and blind not even to acknowledge that more people than you think something different

tl;dr you're not just a faggot but a proud one, even

[Anonymous No.21493155]

>>21493003
i dont hate him but i dont love him either. Cosmic is fine, I just have a general dislike for philosophy youtubers. That being said, I really liked Cosmic's latest video on Jordan Peterson. He showed clearly, step-by-step why Jordan Peterson is not a Christian in the conventional sense.

[Anonymous No.21493200]

>>21493155
>He showed clearly, step-by-step why Jordan Peterson is not a Christian in the conventional sense.
Yes, I really liked this video and I felt that he was not cherrypicking either, I watched other Jordan Peterson videos, that were not part of Cosmic's analysis and JP never commuted to a belief in the historical truth of Christianity, including a long debate with Matt Dillahunty.

I also liked his videos on cosmological arguments and arguments for God's existence in general. I don't want to praise him too much either, but compared to the atheist content 10 years ago, when we had guys like Hitchens or The Amazing Atheist, his content is on a higher level imo.

[Anonymous No.21493206]

>>21493033
"Believe in" implies faith, typically a moralistic one. I believe you're a faggot, but I'm not willing to die for it because I don't really give a shit. I believe my can of ravioli is going to taste fine, but it might not. I wouldn't die for it because it really isn't important. I believe the earth is round, but it doesn't matter much to me if it's flat. Either way I wouldn't be willing to fight and die because someone is trying to mislead people into thinking it's one way or the other.

I also believe that it's wrong to commit murder, torture, or rape. I can't prove that it's wrong. Good and evil or not material concepts and cannot be "proven." Instead, I have a moral concept that I "believe in" as opposed to believe. My faith is such that a Ted Bundy wannabe is not going to convince me otherwise. If I believe that someone is going to perpetrate evils, or if I believe there is a real way to reduce evil, I SHOULD want to die for it. That death is for what one believes in.

To answer your question simply, don't die for anything. You're an NPC. Your idea is to shit out your retarded ideas about freedom and pluralism, and when an autocratic leader threatens to take it away you hope other people die for your beliefs. That's why your beliefs don't matter.

[Anonymous No.21493265]

>>21493033
To make it even simpler, you can't convince a plebbitor to be selfless. Everything is about his pleasure or ubdoots. You're an egoistic retard so nothing you say matters.

[Anonymous No.21493289]

>>21493206
Ah I finally managed to let you spit out some fucking words, pretty awesome for just an NPC, uh?

>a Ted Bundy wannabe is not going to convince me otherwise

That's what is called being stubborn

>if I believe (something) I should want to die for it

Then die, be neither sure that your sacrifice was worth, nor useful. You'll have not to bear the responsibility of your action and you'll not even be conscious of such void. That's the biggest relativism with which you depict others in your mind.

[Anonymous No.21493314]

Relativism and selfishness as well, since you die with a smile on your face for the simple fact that you've realized your fantasy

[Anonymous No.21493331]

>>21493289
>Then die, be neither sure that your sacrifice was worth, nor useful.
Or? Sit with your thumb up your ass? For the individual, nothing you do matters or meaningfully alters the course of history except under exceptional circumstances.
It's better to do than to sit around hoping that others will. So one dies for what they believe in. Good for you, because it made no difference, and good for me, because I did what I wanted to do.

[Anonymous No.21493346]

qutb looks like he has a small brain typical africanoid headshape

[Anonymous No.21493358]

>>21493346
bertrand meanwhile you would probably need a siege ladder to get on top of that forehead the choice is clear desu

[Anonymous No.21493359]

>>21493331
>Or? Sit with your thumb up your ass?

Nice dichotomy mate

>For the individual, nothing you do matters

And tell me mate, how should your death change this fact? People won't find it an exceptional circumstance, but a retard move

[Anonymous No.21493362]

>>21490213
>Now that the dust has settled, who was right here?
>>When you come to look into this argument from design, it is a most astonishing thing that people can believe that this world, with all the things that are in it, with all its defects, should be the best that omnipotence and omniscience has been able to produce in millions of years. I really cannot believe it. Do you think that, if you were granted omnipotence and omniscience and millions of years in which to perfect your world, you could produce nothing better than the Ku-Klux-Klan or the Fascists?
>-Bertram Russell, “Why I am Not a Christian”

It does shock me someone as demonstrably intelligent as Russell would have such a childish reason for denying religion. He doesn't have a clue about what he's talking about. I lost a lot of respect for him after reading his chapter on Aquinas in his history of western philosophy. It was bad faith, and divorced what Aquinas wrote from the context in which it made sense. Utterly pathetic, but a good reminder that people are good at what they're good at, that's it. Russell's place was in the philosophy of science and math, his understanding of religion and metaphysics is/was highschool tier - or he was a liar.

>t. not religious myself

[Anonymous No.21493387]

>>21493359
It doesn't really matter if the masses think something is retarded and shit on you for millenia. You misread it: the point is to die simply because fighting is better than accepting evil.
All of this has gone far from the original topic, which is simply that the way you prove that a belief is truly important is if you would stake your life on it. Would you ride on a train if the engineers decided it wasn't worth risking it?

[Anonymous No.21493397]

>>21490180
the second. knowledge is meaningless if it doesn't lead to action.

[Anonymous No.21493406]

>>21493397

[Anonymous No.21493432]

>>21490221
Jazz is great, fuck this guy

[Anonymous No.21493443]

>>21493397
action is meaningless

[Anonymous No.21493450]

>>21493443
Don't you have a cock to suck?

[Anonymous No.21493456]

>>21493450
god i wish

[Anonymous No.21493463]

>>21493387
Since I unfortunately can't get a bachelor on everything, I usually trust engineers if they say something's unsafe to use, that doesn't mean I'm brainless as you tried to describe me, I can go beyond ontologies and orders, if I believe I've got the right reason to do it

London bobbies would say that jumping in a traffic jam to catch an Uber asap would be unsafe, but today I did it anyway because I'm cold and hungry, and I preferred the idea of being at my cosy place rather than in some shitty London station hoping to catch some night train

Point is, the idea of dying, of being from that point onward unable to defend my ideas appears only as detrimental to me

[Anonymous No.21493464]

>>21493456
Based comeback

[Anonymous No.21493468]

>>21493432
The jazz he is referring to is “Baby It’s Cold Outside”, which disgusted him. He isn’t talking about “Charlie Jones and Suede Jackson Quartet”

[Anonymous No.21493503]

>>21493463
>Since I unfortunately can't get a bachelor on everything, I usually trust engineers if they say something's unsafe to use, that doesn't mean I'm brainless as you tried to describe me, I can go beyond ontologies and orders, if I believe I've got the right reason to do it
I mean if the engineers said
>Yeah the train is awesome we designed it and it works perfectly. Oh uh.... us? We'd... rather not...
If they aren't willing to risk dying on the train neither should you.
>Point is, the idea of dying, of being from that point onward unable to defend my ideas appears only as detrimental to me
That's reasonable. You're not obligated to die just because you're willing to stake your life that you're right.
For most people, all the words they could ever speak wouldn't make a difference, but in throwing away the fear of death it is possible to gain a far greater chance to make some impact, even if it is small.

[Anonymous No.21493585]

>>21490221
>Literally everyone hated jazz back when it was popular and saw it the same way people see rap music today
>Now that it's unpopular, jazz is viewed as classy and sophisticated
Really makes you think.

[Anonymous No.21493649]

>>21493503
Oh ok, I didn't get that part (understand me, I'm getting at the end of a 12 hours trip and I haven't grabbed some food since yesterday)

Obv, if engineers were like "oh sure anon get there, we...will go that way instead" then I'd be suspicious and incongruous af, and probably it's because of the incongruity I feel all around them (from politician or advertisement, just to make a cheap example) I need otherwise to sharp my senses and dispute a bit of everything, as I'm sure you do

Then, talking of the reason why people are so anaesthetised from others' words would take n thousands thread on /lit/, but I think that the idea individuals are moved by someone's death is just a matter of compassion they arbitrarily decide to show at that moment for ideological causes

Anyway, I found it a nice exchange here, I'll tip my fedora to you

[Anonymous No.21493656]

>>21493649
*It'd be suspicious and etc

[Anonymous No.21493660]

>>21493649
And to you.
I retract my previous statement calling you an NPC. You seem rather based.

[Anonymous No.21493723]

>>21493346
>>21493358
Based physiognomy-anon.

[Anonymous No.21493783]

12 million or some such absurd number of people died for the soviet union, and who remembers them now?
there are probably also thousands of deaths in unrecorded medieval battles where villages massacred each other over which village had the true nail or beard hair of some saint who is also for ever forgotten to history

hell, those muslim countries have such medieval events to this day probably

[Anonymous No.21493803]

>>21490180
Russel was a literal (the literal kind) cuck.

[Anonymous No.21493938]

>>21490215
>getting filtered by politics rather than addressing the substance of the argument
There are countless things in the natural world to which one could point to prove this argument. To look at this world and say
>given omnipotence and infinity, this is the best that God could do
is a massive insult to the competence of the God in question.

[Anonymous No.21493944]

>>21493803
Do you have a single fact to back that up?

[Anonymous No.21493947]

>>21491291
nigga you on 4chan shut yo goofy ass up whiteboy *smacks your ass*

[Anonymous No.21494023]

>>21493944
He wrote about it, how he let his wife fuck other men and was fine with it until she got pregnant at which point he regretted it and ultimately divorced her.

[Anonymous No.21494148]

>>21494023
Based

[Anonymous No.21494451]

>>21494023
im pretty sure this is fake but pls tell me its true.

[Anonymous No.21495076]

>>21491665
>Ibn Taymiyyah never, ever says this, it is a strawman Abdul Hakim Murad concocted about him.

I need a quick rundown of this, where exactly do Ibn T and AHM differ?

[Anonymous No.21495085]

>>21494451
>>21493944
>>21494148
It's true, both Russel and his wife (Dora Russel) wrote about it. 2 seconds on google anons
>Russell's marriage to Dora grew increasingly tenuous, and it reached a breaking point over her having two children with an American journalist, Griffin Barry.[34] They separated in 1932 and finally divorced.
Don't forget that not only was Russel a cuck, but he came from a long line of cucks. His dad was cucked and little Betrand watched and even knew the man who was his tutor, a fellow named Douglas Spalding.

So yeah, this is a cuck thread, for cucks. Without any irony or embellishment.

[Anonymous No.21495099]

>>21490180
Russell was a disgusting faggot and deserved to be beaten to death in front of his mother. Nothing he produced was of value.

[Anonymous No.21495102]

>>21495076
AHM follows al-Ghazali in believing in divine command theory and in occasionalism. Ibn Taymiyyah believes in natural law and efficient causation. These are the main points of difference but there are many others

[Anonymous No.21495109]

>>21490213
The Ku-Klux-Klan did nothing wrong. Blacks commit more than half of all the homicides in the country, and the government does nothing to stop them. They merely did what the State could not. The Fascists merely fought back against Communism, an ideology which killed more people than every religious war ever fought.

Cuckold, faggot, bootlicker for Jews. Low-IQ and provably wrong. Glad he died like a bitch and he is currently in Hell being tortured for eternity.

[Anonymous No.21495127]

>>21495099
He doesn't have a grave, but I pissed on that statue of him in Holborn. Had to get a good arc to really have the stream hit his face.

[Anonymous No.21495135]

[Anonymous No.21495377]

>>21495085
So this is the god of reddit. A literal cuck.

[Anonymous No.21495383]

>>21495377
>>21492951

[Anonymous No.21495488]

>>21492951
>Has anyone been able to rebut Bertrand Russell's famous reason-based ethical argument in “Marriage and Morals”?
Russel refuted it himself when he divorced his wife for getting pregnant with another man's kids, twice. Once was ok, but two times? No, no, that's where he draws the line.

[Anonymous No.21495506]

>>21495488
As hom

[Anonymous No.21495552]

>>21493362
>I lost a lot of respect for him after reading his chapter on Aquinas in his history of western philosophy. It was bad faith, and divorced what Aquinas wrote from the context in which it made sense.
Russell was a notoriously bad/uncharitable reader of philosophy. There's occasionally times that I happen to agree with him (the older I've gotten, the more I think he was right about Nietzsche), and there's other times where some insight can be gained through his terrible reading, but for the most part it's not worth it to read his commentary on any other thinker.

[Anonymous No.21495571]

>>21495085
>>21495099
>>21495377
AHAHAHAHA fuck that squeaking british bugfaced nigger.

[Anonymous No.21495585]

>>21495552
>(the older I've gotten, the more I think he was right about Nietzsche)
Now that's a rare opinion, I've never heard anyone saying anything other than he completely mischaracterizes and misunderstands Nietzsche while putting him in a covenient albeit incongruous little box for the public to spit on framed by recent anti-Nazi sentiment. Why do you say this?

[Anonymous No.21495613]

>>21495585
Nietzsche made some unfortunately and clearly unkind comments about the Jewish people in Genealogy of Morals. I realize he was ashamed of them and sought to atone but one cannot entirely forgive his lapse in this regard

[Anonymous No.21495653]

>>21495552
>Russell was a notoriously bad/uncharitable reader of philosophy
Really? I thought he considered himself a philosopher, and was one of the first in the analytic tradition. Maybe you meant he had a history of being ignorant in terms of continental philosophy? I dont know much about Russell, so I wont be shocked if my assumption is totally wrong - he instead thinking of himself as a scientist or linguist or whatever first.

[Anonymous No.21495780]

>>21491843
>Nietzsche did not believe imposing your beliefs was “inauthentic”
He says it matters for people to have a taste they can call their own, rather than following another one's taste. He rejects following herd morality for the reason that it is not particularist enough. If you read The Gay Science and Thus Spoke Zarathustra you cannot think Nietzsche thought it was fine to impose beliefs on others. Zarathustra himself tells his disciples not to follow him as a criticism. You read Nietzsche but didn't understand him.
>Heidegger doesn’t suggest that. He doesn’t think Das Man is something you need to “get out of” rather than it is everyday life and part of functioning society. Stepping out of it is only a possibility at particular junctures when one must consciously do so, a very uncomfortable ordeal, or not
Heidegger doesn't think it's possible to step out of das Man very long so he grants how fleeting that is, but that doesn't mean he sees it positively or even as neutrally as you suggest.
>when you complain Qutb wanted a theocracy
I never said anything about theocracy.
>Kierkegaard
Kierkegaard's account of subjectivism is that it matters more to have the right attitude in believing something, than the truth of what you believe in. So he feels a pagan might be better off than a Christian if they have the passion of the infinite. He just thinks Christianity, owing to its absurd mysteries, is a better method to make the leap of faith into the infinite, necessary to become a knight of faith, wherein one believes one can get back (on the strength of the absurd) what one resigned from in the previous stage. Does Qutb have such a pragmatic instrumental understanding of Islam as Kierkegaard? Does he agree that a pagan who holds wrong beliefs but has the passion of the infinite would be better than a hypothetical Muslim who doesn't? I'm aware that he agrees a Muslim might lack that sort of passion (so to speak), since he says so-called Muslims may live in a state of jahiliyya. But does he accept the way Kierkegaard goes beyond that? If Qutb thinks, as many of his Qutbist-inspired Muslim disciples think, that you HAVE to be Muslim to be, in a sense, on the right true path, then he is nothing like Kierkegaard, not in the relevant way.

[Anonymous No.21495804]

>>21491291
Few will appreciate the insight of this statement

[Anonymous No.21495808]

>>21490734
A 30 yr old devoting himself to a true cause he believes in and dying for it lives a life 10 x more full than a 90 yr old with no conviction and having spent his lifespan in vapid idle pursuits.

[Anonymous No.21495916]

>>21495808
What constitutes a full life?

[Anonymous No.21496503]

>>21490191
Nobody forced this LARPing faggot to die, he literally did it himself. He's the worst example you could possibly use to illustrate those words (but you probably knew that already anyway).

[Anonymous No.21496520]

>>21496503
He was forced by his morals to do so. Read the SoF tetralogy, he talks about Hagakure themes, especially during Isao's discourse with Prince Toin. You're retarded if you think the only manner in which death can be external is if it is someone killing you against your own will.

[Anonymous No.21496713]

>>21495780
>you cannot think Nietzsche thought it was fine to impose beliefs on others.

Ah, I don’t think he considered it one way or the other, but just a fact of life. Trying to say it should be otherwise is like saying a man should be allowed to be a woman because it is not fair he is a man and it is not okay to be man. The idea that Nietzsche was some sort of moralistic liberal or even an anarchist as you suggest can be corrected by reading Beyond Good and Evil

>but that doesn't mean he sees it positively or even as neutrally as you suggest
You’re grasping at straws. Again, as with Nietzsche, Heidegger sees Das Man as an essential condition of humanity, a fact of life and existence for Dasein. The idea of being positive or negative toward this to him would be fruitcake speculation akin to feeling negative that men don’t have wings or women don’t have four wombs. Further than that even because such a society could still function but a society without Das Man could not, it would collapse into extinction very quickly

>If Qutb thinks, as many of his Qutbist-inspired Muslim disciples think, that you HAVE to be Muslim to be, in a sense, on the right true path, then he is nothing like Kierkegaard, not in the relevant way.

Both men believe their religion to be true. Kierkegaard believed truth and authenticity were distinct—as did Qutb—but that doesn’t mean Kierkegaard thought truth has no value, only authenticity, as you suggest here. That’s really very silly

[Anonymous No.21496748]

>>21490801
Ahh, I see. Someone who reads Nietzsche

[Anonymous No.21496829]

>>21490213

[Anonymous No.21496894]

>>21490255
This, by the glory of dubz

[Anonymous No.21496969]

>>21490255
true. all theological arguments rest on a set of theological axioms which tend not to be totally self evident so can easily be rejected

[Anonymous No.21497960]

>>21496503
the reason he died was because he believed in his ideals so strongly which actually does prove this point

[Anonymous No.21498605]

>>21493362
He sort of knew his days of big thinking were done when he met Wittgenstein who totally eclipsed him. I think a lot of his later work is more polemic for the sake of pressing a political message rather than a pure philosophical endeavor. Most of his mathematical work is truly high quality

>>21491291
Maybe briefly when he witnessed Wittgensteins genius in the flesh and maybe when he cheated on his wife

[Anonymous No.21498623]

>>21498605

[Anonymous No.21498697]

>>21493803
>Russell was a literal cuck

you’re saying he was a bird ??

[Anonymous No.21499755]

>>21491291

[Anonymous No.21499829]

>>21498605
>think a lot of his later work is more polemic for the sake of pressing a political message rather than a pure philosophical endeavor.
He had about two to three good books left in him after 1920, but otherwise you're right.

[Anonymous No.21499928]

>>21490412
Qutb never involved himself in any form of violence, and he heroically shouldered a great deal of violence against himself for his beliefs.

[Anonymous No.21499945]

>>21490180
I would die for my beliefs because I might be wrong

[Anonymous No.21499953]

>>21493362
>someone as demonstrably intelligent as Russell
stopped reading here. being able to do maths does not make you demonstrably intelligent.

[Anonymous No.21499971]

>>21499953
Tell the world anon, tell the world your golden standard of intelligence.

[Anonymous No.21499995]

>>21499971
There is no golden standard, that's why it's intelligence, and not just skill, or a skill. Intelligence is in fact the holistic gauge of a person's enlightenment, which is irreducible to any specific skill or knowledge. In other words it is "unquantifiable" in its essence. We will never have a measure for it. This fully explains the existence of people, like Russell, who hyperfocus on typically "smart" disciplines like maths, yet in general lack intelligence.

[Anonymous No.21500039]

>>21499995
I'm pleasantly surprised by your reply, was expecting a shitpost. Have a lovely day anon :)

[Anonymous No.21500278]

>>21490180
>>21499945

i choose this way imo, least suicidy squatty potty possible

[Anonymous No.21500284]

>>21500278
How do these things get published with absolutely no proofreading done whatsoever?

[Anonymous No.21501081]

>>21492951
Lord almighty, what are these statements how can anyone take Russel seriously. Even a layman that only read the bible once in his life knows what gluttony is and how to define it, its access in food and drink purely for pleasure. Someone salting his food to make it more palatable is not the same as a pig of a man eating a five course meal drowning in exotic and expensive spices. This is just the fallacy of the heap. And I have no comment if you cant realize the benefits of monogamy to the average person.

[Anonymous No.21501085]

>>21501081
excess*