>"There are people who are just fundamentally better than everyone else except it's based in metrics that cannot ever be proven">"How do you actually know who are the people are fundamentally better? Aaahhh, uhhh, errrmm, well, if you were one of them you would just know, ok?!"Was Julius Evola the most retarded philosopher ever?
>>25301766>Better Meaningless value judgement.
>>25301766>Was Julius Evola the most retarded philosopher ever?idk havent read him
>>25301766>Was Julius Evola the most retarded philosopher ever?no that was Marx
>>25301766>the vast majority of people are like, heckin cattle n sheit bro>when you say vast majority, what exactly do you mean?>like, 98 or 99 percent of people bro. the herd n sheit bro. im part of the select few n sheit>isn't it overwhelmingly more likely that you're in the herd?>no bro I'm based n sheit I can't be in the herd n sheit>why not?>cause I'm based n sheit>but surely among that 99% are hundreds of thousands who also believe they're based and still remain in the herd?>no bro they're wrong cause they not based n sheit but I'm right cause I'm based>how do you know you're part of the select few, then?>cause... cause... I JUST AM OKAY I'M BASED OKAY Chuds still say this kind of thing and then get upset when people make fun of them.
>>25301766>Was Julius Evola the most retarded philosopher ever?Not even a philosopher. Just a dumb sophist, larper, and pseudointellectual.
>>25301890>Not even a philosopher. Just a dumb sophist, larper, and pseudointellectual.but enough about Marx
>>25301866The fact that he makes you seethe is proof enough of his intelligence and relevance
>>25301903You quoted OP wrong, here let me help >>25301766
>>25301901Neither are philosophers but Evola was surely more retarded than Marx.
>>25301766Actually quote him or shut your fundamentally lesser mouth.
>>25301916How so?
>>25301920Lies and larps less. Marx really only pretended to know one subject whereas Evola pretended to know about many. And Marx certainly knew more about his one topic (economics) than Evola knew about religion, or any of the other topics he wrote about. He's a far bigger pseud.
>>25301866>>25301901>>25301906>literally just "you bad, me good"the apple does not fall far from the tree
>>25301886This post was clearly written by a member of the herd. Men whose intelligence puts them head and shoulders above the normie masses are also intelligent enough to recognize their genius. Total 80iq brainlet cope to be like>heh, that’s what you think chud, everyone is actually just as dumb as I am
>>25301946I thought it was making fun of the fact that Evola rejected notions of aristocracy and genius based on biological aspects or anything empirically testable, in favor of a "spiritual aristocracy" (definitely not because he was a fake aristocrat, of course!)
>>25301946>This post was clearly written by a member of the herd. Men whose intelligence puts them head and shoulders above the normie masses are also intelligent enough to recognize their genius.
>>25301946>Total 80iq brainlet cope A real evolatard would reject IQ-based evaluations of intelligence for being mofuggin materialist, thoughever.
>>25301946>>25301953>>25301958>you can just be the smartest person ever with no actual evidence other than a subjective feeling about being the smartest person everHoly shit, that is freaking retarded. Does anyone actually believe this??
It is not that he is correct, more that he is interestingly wrong. A lot like a Marxist.
>>25301993Marx was right about almost everything though
>>25301766I might not agree with Evola on most things, but I sometimes wonder if you oxygen thieves have ever actually read his works or you just cherry pick quotes from search engine results. Or worse, that you have read him and ignore his reasoning around lines like this where he explains his thought. It's literally plebbit tier ree fascist level stuff. That said the existence of India suggests he's entirely correct in thinking of some as qualitatively better than others. Which is ironic with his love of India and its religions.
>>25301766>betterpossibly but without real leadership about it all just goes to pot in the end.
>>25301976Evola and Miguel Serrano and probably some other esoteric rw retards.
>>25302138>Which is ironic with his love of India and its religions.We are better people than you though. And he recognised it.
>>25301886To even acknowledge that a hierarchy exists is to be above the hoi polloi already.
>>25302150Don't you have some shit to be eating, jeet?
>>25302150you live in a garbage dump the size of a subcontinent and you have poop festivals. in the hierarchy of living beings you're below most beasts.
>>25302138>It's literally plebbit tier ree fascist level stuff. That's the whole board since the /leftypol/ raid started
>>25302138>>25302234Nothing about the anti-Evola comments ITT suggest themselves to be from leftists, like >>25301953 or >>25301958for instance.
>>25301766he's completely right btw
>>25302138this board doesn't read, it's all posturing based around what twitter/instagram/youtube post they saw and are now regurgitating.
>>25302318>evola was a dumb pseudointellectual chud unlike hecking wholesome economics genius marx>i'm not a leftist btwleast obvious shill
>>25302376But that's clearly not what that post says
>>25302430
>>25301766The whole point of Tradition is that the better breed of men will naturally rule in better times, but as the world degenerates the lesser lot will gain power. He's not trying to advocate for some model of government, merely saying that things were better and are now worse. So if you actually wanted to refute Evola you would've made a post trying to prove those earlier times were worse. Instead you've simply made yourself look ignorant and dim-witted.
>>25301766>make thread with fake quoteThe fact that he makes you seethe is proof enough of his intelligence and relevance
>>25301866Marx was based
>>25301766If one were to place a negation sign in front of his oeuvre, one would express an important truth.
>>25301766>there are arguments we shouldnt argue about>ERM UM SOURCE?
>>25301946>Men whose intelligence puts them head and shoulders above the normie masses are also intelligent enough to recognize their geniusDunning Kruger effect says otherwise, retard. Also from anecdotal experience very intelligent people like Terrence Tao are also very kind, gracious, and humble despite their intellects.
Its just something you know and accept innately simple as’
>>25302490>imagine an enemy in your head >insist any nuance of thought is his villainous scheme
Test
>>25301766It's actually very apparent to those who are not of the lowest caste.
>>25302544every Evola thread has a similar trajectory, as soon as you open it you can easily move the scrollbar at least half-way to skip the usual LLM tier snarky comments about an opinion that in fact isn't really Evola's but was held as obvious to anyone born 100 years ago and of some importance, then maybe you'll find some more interesting comments
>>25302055Not necessarily. And not everything can proved by materialism. The idea of "mathematizing" everything to the last millimeter keeps us so far from the actual truth.
>>25301766>>25301886Sophistry and word games to deny a self-evident faucet of material existence.
>>25303469>faucetkek, facet
>>25301766>There are people who are just fundamentally better than everyone else except it's based in metrics that cannot ever be provenYou're being disingenuous to begin with so I'm retarded for replying, but that statement is completely true. A person's internal reality is almost entirely ineffable and inexpressible. >>25301886The difference between a person with 130 IQ and 150 IQ is impossible for a 130 IQ person to fully understand, and both of those people might as well be considered a different species than 100 IQ people, and likewise between 100 and 80 IQ people. 135 is the 99th percentile. If you have an IQ of 130 and aren't in a particular kind of social milieu (rarefied i.e. uncommon) that sorts for high intelligence, you are likely the smartest person in the room everywhere you go for weeks or months at a time. For people with 150 IQ, it's years at a time. Statistically, if there are 7B humans on Earth, there are at least 100 million of these people floating around in the world. It is not unrealistic in the slightest to say that some people are cattle and some people are actual ensouled high quality people
>>25303508Evola wouldn't defend the usage of IQ because it's materialist and not based upon spiritual hierarchy
>>25303529I understand what you are saying, and you might be right that he would insist on making such a point, but I use IQ as shorthand for the hierarchy of overall depth of internal experience and cognitive capacity, not the actual test score. It's obvious that people who speak colloquially about IQ are referring to the underlying trait G (ineffable) to people who have spent time with the intelligence literature. The fact is that there might be a number of instances in the history of humanity where an 80 IQ nigger is of the same spiritual type a particular 150 IQ individual, but this would be an absurdly tiny minority of cases and more remarkable as an exception to the rule. And it goes without saying that the hierarchy of people is not 1:1 with the intelligence hierarchy, I was mentioning intelligence as an obvious, observable example of differences between people so that we have something to talk about. The fact that we can't talk about inexpressible existential (soul-level) differences between people doesn't mean they don't exist
>>25301886being ensouled also has no relation to ideology. every leftist/apolitical/medieval/ancient writer has had to make some distinction between those capable of thought and those incapable.
>>25301766Muh West is collapsing.Just adopt an Astérix and Obélix mentality.Go full retard.
>>25302490I love that post.>Why do people not understand what our inane statements based on decades of indoctrination that contradicts any rational logic or personal experience are getting at.>Must be disingenuous leftists.Don't worry, maybe if you add more incomprehensible neologisms, people will finally be on the same page.
>>25301766many great philosophers have written about the inability to prove anything at all.
