Topic: I'm proud to be a failure
+Nautphagina !MLHqI35Srs — 12.6 years ago #32,379
Because it means I didn't attain the system's GIVEN success, I succeeded in my own filth. This is the only true feat an individual could ever accredit themselves, for everything else is deterministic garbage and you're all in self-aggrandized denial, 'self-made' prole sheeple. I'm not saying it makes me special, unique, or superior, this is me being quite matter-of-fact, in the distillation of my meanderances. I mean 'pride' as Pierce meant it, a private, intrinsic notion of justified confidence in the absolute.
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
+Motherfuckin' !xHGARYoak6 — 12.6 years ago, 14 minutes later[T] [B] #372,956
In my opinion, someone can only be a failure or a "winner" if they deem themselves so.
·Nautphagina !MLHqI35Srs (OP) — 12.6 years ago, 2 minutes later, 16 minutes after the original post[T] [B] #372,957
@previous (Motherfuckin' !xHGARYoak6)
Which is somewhat my point. Modern culture simply likes to misattribute the deterministic with the subjective, in itself a form of individual blame-game, quite worthless when the more solid philosophy and science behind the matter is concerned. 'Deeming' themselves began with that realization in the premonitive.
Which is somewhat my point. Modern culture simply likes to misattribute the deterministic with the subjective, in itself a form of individual blame-game, quite worthless when the more solid philosophy and science behind the matter is concerned. 'Deeming' themselves began with that realization in the premonitive.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
·Motherfuckin' !xHGARYoak6 — 12.6 years ago, 4 minutes later, 21 minutes after the original post[T] [B] #372,958
·Motherfuckin' !xHGARYoak6 — 12.6 years ago, 1 minute later, 22 minutes after the original post[T] [B] #372,959
Actually, to avoid making another thread.
Do you read any philosophy? Anything you would recommend to someone who has really only dealt with Plato and philosophy on morality?
Do you read any philosophy? Anything you would recommend to someone who has really only dealt with Plato and philosophy on morality?
·Nautphagina !MLHqI35Srs (OP) — 12.6 years ago, 12 minutes later, 35 minutes after the original post[T] [B] #372,960
@previous (Motherfuckin' !xHGARYoak6)
I eschew Neo-Platonism (utilizing it simply as the lesser of the two evils Greece and Rome represent cladistically as cultural precepts to Christian Universalism) so I can tell you, you've indulged in what was quite easily worthless garbage. It's the paleoconservative position to suck his decrepit cock, but not so much the neo-reactionary one, given our distrust of the Masonic/Mosean/pre-communistic precepts of legal centralism which would gradually evolve into socialist collectivism.
Read the likes of Cioran, Neitschze, Evola, List, Herman-Hoppe, Emil von Ludwig, and, on the recommendation of some tumblr I previous followed, Land's Dark Enlightenment. Avoid Southgate and Faulk's personality cult except for economics, race-realism, indigenous culture and epistemology only. Pierce is good for a general overview of the corpus if you've no time to look into individual authors. Yes he's an amateur political theorist and no philosopher of any sort, but he writes comprehensively but tersely. Avoid ancient Greek and Roman histories for they are again drudged up and re-interpreted by the same forces peddling a return to relativist obfuscation with no clear semantic boundaries.
I eschew Neo-Platonism (utilizing it simply as the lesser of the two evils Greece and Rome represent cladistically as cultural precepts to Christian Universalism) so I can tell you, you've indulged in what was quite easily worthless garbage. It's the paleoconservative position to suck his decrepit cock, but not so much the neo-reactionary one, given our distrust of the Masonic/Mosean/pre-communistic precepts of legal centralism which would gradually evolve into socialist collectivism.
Read the likes of Cioran, Neitschze, Evola, List, Herman-Hoppe, Emil von Ludwig, and, on the recommendation of some tumblr I previous followed, Land's Dark Enlightenment. Avoid Southgate and Faulk's personality cult except for economics, race-realism, indigenous culture and epistemology only. Pierce is good for a general overview of the corpus if you've no time to look into individual authors. Yes he's an amateur political theorist and no philosopher of any sort, but he writes comprehensively but tersely. Avoid ancient Greek and Roman histories for they are again drudged up and re-interpreted by the same forces peddling a return to relativist obfuscation with no clear semantic boundaries.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
+The Doctor !7MHPahvoGY — 12.6 years ago, 2 hours later, 3 hours after the original post[T] [B] #372,982
+Anonymous D — 12.6 years ago, 36 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[T] [B] #372,994
nvm
(Edited 29 seconds later.)
+Anonymous E — 12.6 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[T] [B] #372,998
Start a new topic to continue this conversation.
Or browse the latest topics.