is esoterik kantianism the official philosophy of /lit/?
You don't even have to speak because I can hear your heartbeatFluttering like butterflies searching for a drinkYou don't have to cover up how you feel when your in loveI'll always know I'm not enough to even make you think
Esoteric 'hauerism
>>25262613Been a while since I've seen a good 'hauer thread on the 'log
Nay, 'tis clandestine antinomian Boehme'tism
>>25262596according to the official /lit/ charter: yes
>>25262596A “philosophy” for dissociative retards. Sure, why not?
>>25262596Kantianism is just born-again Christianity for atheists. the real philosophy of /lit/ is attention seeking contrarianism.
>>25262699What are you associated with?
>>25262613schopenhauer was esoterik kantian tho>even if Magic were to be ranked as practical Metaphysic, according to Bacon's classification, it is certain that no other theoretical Metaphysic would stand in the right relation to it but mine, by which the world is resolved into Will and Representation.
>>25262703this atheist>the hypothesis of a wise author of the universe is necessary for my guidance in the investigation of nature—is the condition under which alone I can fulfil an end which is contingent indeed, but by no means unimportant. Moreover, since the result of my attempts so frequently confirms the utility of this assumption, and since nothing decisive can be adduced against it, it follows that it would be saying far too little to term my judgement, in this case, a mere opinion, and that, even in this theoretical connection, I may assert that I FIRMLY BELIEVE IN GOD.-KdRV A826/B854
>>25262735The Schopenhauerian Wille is Vril?omg it all makes sense now wtf
>>25262739yes. an atheist is someone who does not take mythology and fairytales literally. I know every rhetorical trick in the book so don't try to mince words and convince me that the majority of people today are not atheist liberals.
>>25262745if it took you this long to realize Schop was talking about vril it never even began for you.
>>25262750>an atheist is someone who does not take mythology and fairytales literally.
isn’t esotericism mainly about concealing religious beliefs? it seems like philosophical theses aren’t really worth the trouble
PAX TIBI!!<;=
>>25262755yes. there was this fellow named Charles Darwin. you should read about him.
>>25262762>t. doesn't know>The objects of philosophy, it is true, are upon the whole the same as those of religion. In both the object is Truth, in that supreme sense in which God and God only is the Truth.
>>25262596just put the fries in the bag, Gonzalez.
>>25262739They a turn out to be midwits in the end.
>>25262804>t. midwit
>>25262775yeah you know what you’re right, esotericism is really about accepting abstract identifications at face value
>>25262752what's vril?
So apparently even Evola was an esoterik kantian early on but then abandoned the project and just went full Guenonian/Traditionalist. Small world I guess.
>>25263294read Spengler. I'm not going to spoon feed you.
>>25263308this means esoterik kantianism truly is the philosophy of /lit/ because previously it was Evolaism/Guenonism but now that it has died down /lit/ is realizing actually its craving for knowledge and wisdom must go deeper than what the Tradition can provide: it needs not historische Erkenntnis, but vernünftige Erkenntnis; not cognitio ex datis, but cognitio ex principiis.
>>25263313wtf does spengler have to do with vril?
>>25263324iykyk
>>25263328tell meeeeeee
>>25262596Yeah, you've successfully shilled Kant to the point that anons are studying him. It would seem to me that many philosophers are occasionally discussed here but Kant and Aristotle are the main players.
>>25263371we did this team. the esoterik kantian kouncil did this. together.
you guys should start a discord or something. i would join. it sounds like fun.
>>25263656Discord is for fags. 4chan as bad as it is is objectively better for having ongoing conversations than discord. The main thing the esoteric Kantians need to do right now is figure out the Fichte-Schelling-Hegel nexus. For a couple of years we've been shitposting about them but there are still many unsettled issues. I can't lie I'm a partisan for Fichte; I think he's objectively superior to the other two and the only one who can legitimately claim the title of an esoteric Kantian or would even want it. I think the core tenets of the esoteric Kantian movement are present in Fichte most clearly and decidedly including the most rarified elements like the superimposition of the imagination. As I understand it the originator of esoteric Kantianism did not read Fichte he just smoked a ton of weed and read Kant over and over again, this itself is proof that Fichte was onto something since two people came to similar positions by reading Kant alone. The endgame imo is and must be the institution of a new state, Socialism with Autistic Characteristics as outlined in Fichte's FNR. In this new state we can all be professional state philosophers and hardly do more work than we already do writing retarded 4chan posts. Meanwhile our enemies will be condemned to the state-owned mining and logging industries.
>>25262596>LLM philosophy: official philosophy of /lit/
>>25263673kys
>>25263670>As I understand it the originator of esoteric Kantianism did not read Fichte he just smoked a ton of weed and read Kant over and over againLMAO
>>25263674Awh, the llm downie is seething
>>25263670are you the fichteposter?
>>25263371>anons are studying himwhat makes you say that?
Fichte saw modernity as an immature child being loosed on the world. He thought things would get much worse before they ever got better. He was fucking right and Hegel was wrong.
>>25263823Fichte was so based.
>>25263823>Hegel was wrongI’m glad more of /lit/ are starting to understand this.
>>25263835Yeah he was and you would never know it but for here. Ffs this looks like the most pathetic samefag but it isn't. Everyone I have looked at so far to see what they thought about Fichte with the exception of people like Gottlieb, Breazeale, Zoeller who are dedicated scholars of his, is parroting some version of Hegel's critiques, generally b/w an environmental angle because of Fichte's language about the domination of nature. Yes Fichte the philosopher from a dirt poor background who lost most of his siblings to illness and lived before the industrial revolution had taken off in Germany didn't have a modern understanding of nature as a warm fuzzy place to be preserved and cherished. I feel that he has never gotten his due out in the wild and barely even in academia. He's a major philosopher with real insight into the nature of consciousness and the modern world. It is just so easy to soundbite him because in the only published version of his Wissenschaftslehre (or the foundational portions anyway) he goes out of his way to use the ugliest language possible as a challenge to the reader. So you can say "look here, he says the not-I should not exist! He's talking about covering everything up in parking lots!" and this is really about the level of most scholarship I have seen on Fichte, and the only way to correct it would be to write a commentary on the entire book. He also emulates Kant in writing esoterically, not explaining himself too clearly, leaving a huge amount of work and apparent 'gaps' on the shoulders of the reader, he just did this too well such that no one bothers to read him. Here is a relatively new interview with Gottlieb that is wide-ranging but talks about Kant and Fichte a lot. Unfortunately it is extremely difficult to talk about German idealism in any depth viva voce without tripping over your own tongue. Still worth a listen I think maybe I'll post thoughts later. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuEU4VXzkLs&pp=ygUPZ290dGxpZWIgZmljaHRl
>>25263936I see. I’ve not yet read him but he is in fact the man if chosen to pursue next after Kant since I’m on the KrV. Though I’ve still got a bit to go. Ill keep in mind his esotericism and I’ll check out the link. Thanks a lot anon.
>>25263936niiice. I used to follow Gabe on X.
>>25263968Me too actually or at least I glanced at it. I got a kek out of the picture of his babby wearing a shirt with a priori/a posteriori written on it with arrows up and down. Not as funny or cute when written out like that thoughbeit.>>25263953That's what I did too I read Kant's three critiques and the groundwork; I was starting to warm to Kant after the third critique but Fichte is what ended up being so exciting. I was getting filtered badly by Kant, in retrospect, reading him is about more than being able to follow the words on the page but I wasn't there yet; Fichte blew things open for me.
>>25262596I would claim that if something that is being claimed then what needs wanting is some immediate contextualization of the kantian milieu weltanschaung of those days and that reading room culture before and during the biedermeier era and i would bring in the metaphysical ideas of alexander baumgarten which along with hume are claimed to have spurred kant to eschew dog ownership and also newly spurred really thinking of the triune relationship between hume kant and rousseau and the opinions each had of the other during the so called age of enlightenment the afarklang of that age also part of the occluding influx might have to be said the neoplatonism which was much in influx and that partly united all these thinkers during the age of the enlightenment and part of the story is that this neoplatonism is almost an eldritch holdover from an earlier age but also part of the backdrop that unites kant and leibniz and ever renews neoplatonism despite neoplatonism almost always out of the style and then in that type thing is where aristotle begins to revive from the macedonian rubble aristotle always threatens to dissolve collapse back into and i would advise this as a gnomon to take before venturing and entering to talk about the post-kantians and that is some context for go back to the claim that kant is making to enlightenment and then the claims or duties or something like that that follow after that and also that the claims of kant and what kant claims about reason are equivocal and that a further husserlian bracket is called for phenomenologically bracket some of those claims about metaphysics and additionally about epistemes
I'm trying so hard to find the passage in the Doctrine of Method where Kant talks about how the reader has to think for himself and the philosopher is a teacher of philosophical thinking moreso than of philosophy, because it directly backs the entire worldwide esoteric Kantian movement, but I can't find it >:(
>>25264040bro wut
>>25264063Dude, kants 1784 essay what is enlightenment partly contextualizes some of the pretenses that kantiasm would have as to being an official philosophy
>>25264052I got you senpai>Philosophy—unless it be in an historical manner—cannot be learned; we can at most learn to philosophize.>Philosophy is the system of all philosophical cognition. We must use this term in an objective sense, if we understand by it the archetype of all attempts at philosophizing, and the standard by which all subjective philosophies are to be judged. In this sense, philosophy is merely the idea of a possible science, which does not exist in concreto, but to which we endeavour in various ways to approximate, until we have discovered the right path to pursue—a path overgrown by the errors and illusions of sense,—and the image we have hitherto tried to shape in vain, has become a perfect copy of the great prototype. Until that time, we cannot learn philosophy—it does not exist; if it does, where is it, who possesses it, and how shall we know it? We can only learn to philosophize; in other words, we can only exercise our powers of reasoning in accordance with general principles, retaining at the same time, the right of investigating the sources of these principles, of testing, and even of rejecting them.It's in the Architechtonic of Pure Reason
>>25262596Esoteric Kantianism is just more astroturfing by the Guenon guy isn't it? Be honest.>Guenon talks about intellectual intuition and is all esoteric>Guenon guy astroturfs him circa 2018>Guenonism eventually gets trashed>Suddenly esoteric Kantianism>Kant uses the term intellectual intuition tooI think the development of astroturfed 4chanism should be radically accelerated actually. Just skip the filler and get us to the late stages. Complete the system of /lit/ian idealism. Go all out. Make bold controversial claims. Tell us why the system actually culminates in Russellian monism or Carnapian constructionalism or young Marxian-Engelsian humanistic-dialectical materialism or Buchlerian ordinal naturalism or Buberian dialogism or Bergsonian durationism or something.
>>25264092Thank you <:)
>>25262750isn't this a grossly circular definition, as well as not really tecnically boxing in any religion?
>>25264106>Make bold controversial claims.this why i mine /lit/ because i can just say shit on here in all serious everywhere else would just produce the npc stare. i can't say straight up Fichte was a proto-nazi because then the normtards will get all hot and bothered, no i have to say he was a "german nationalist" and down any connection to the nazis. same goes for neetch and heidi.
i rarely edit my posts. i just say fuck it and hit post and if they're fucked they're fucked.
>>25264384Lel same, though it’s probably the worst place to do this. /lit/ that is, given its pedantry.
>>25263324>Numbers Chapter>>25264106>I think the development of astroturfed 4chanism should be radically accelerated actually.e.g. Nick Land
>>25263936>Unfortunately it is extremely difficult to talk about German idealism in any depth viva voce without tripping over your own tongueWhy do you say that?
>>25263936tarte a la creme!
>>25263936>Yes Fichte the philosopher from a dirt poor background who lost most of his siblings to illness and lived before the industrial revolution had taken off in Germany didn't have a modern understanding of nature as a warm fuzzy place to be preserved and cherished.He was a real one. I love him.
>Magicians and scientists are, on the face of it, poles apart. Certainly, a group of people who often dress strangely, live in a world of their own, speak a specialized language and frequently make statements that appear to be in flagrant breach of common sense have nothing in common with a group of people who often dress strangely, speak a specialized language, live in … er ...—Terry Pratchett, in The Science of Discworld (1999)
