Serious The West is low IQ

[subhuman]

The modern materialistic worldview in the West that our faculties of pure reason alone are enough to understand true metaphysics is retarded. Yeah we have technology and "progress" and shit, but we completely ignore spiritual wisdom and have completely lost touch with the deeper reality of the world. The result is the West has become degenerate and morally bankrupt, hellbent on destroying itself. Thankfully the spiritual teachings are still alive in the East, valuing intellectual intuition, but it sickens me that they are abandoning it in favor of Western materialism.

Everything beautiful comes from the East, and it goes to the West to die. Like how the setting sun dies in the West. Much of what we have is actually stolen from Asia. Greek philosophy for example, was largely stolen and plagiarized from India. And even then, the works of philosophers like Plato failed to match Indian works like the Vedas in their depth and insights. You could make an argument Christianity is the same way.

Unironically the more I mature the more I find myself abandoning Western ideas and becoming an Asiaboo. I just don't see a way to revitalize spirituality and esoteric tradition in the West without Asian influence. Maybe all the Muslim immigrants is a good thing. Maybe it is just a stronger culture conquering the weaker one.

 

[subhuman]

Jews ruined it

Unironically the West was at it's peak during the so called "Christian dark ages". If I had to live in a Western country at any point in time, I would choose then.

 

[1337hikki]

shitskin cope, india has always been a backwards shithole
altho ofc west is degenerate now

 

[mentally lost cel 1]

shitskin cope, india has always been a backwards shithole

 

[subhuman]

shitskin cope, india has always been a backwards shithole

I'm mayocel american

 

[Misogynist Curry 卐]

Based

 

[1337hikki]

I'm mayocel american

religion is big gay, go meditate or some shit if u wanna be spiritual

 

[subhuman]

meditate

 

[1337hikki]

hey idk it's just what came to mind, lucid dreaming then? Better than praying to Ganesh jfl

 

[ServusLuciferi]

Unironically the West was at it's peak during the so called "Christian dark ages". If I had to live in a Western country at any point in time, I would choose then.

Nah it was the Renaissance. You saw a revitalization of Plato and Platonic spiritual traditions long suppressed by Thomism.

 

[subhuman]

Better than praying to Ganesh jfl

Unironically, its the exoteric traditions like praying to Ganesh that makes Eastern spirituality so pure and true to our origins. The idea that these time honored Hindu traditions are somehow frivolous is proof that you have been corrupted by Western materialism.

 

[based_meme]

but we completely ignore spiritual wisdom and have completely lost touch with the deeper reality of the world.

What is that, exactly?

Also, JFL @ worshipping a human-elephant chimera.

 

[subhuman]

What is that, exactly?

The Truth, the metaphysical principles of the primordial tradition, which is mankind's one true religion. Through initiatory esotericism we can trace our initiatic lineages back to it.

Also, JFL @ worshipping a human-elephant chimera.

see:

Unironically, its the exoteric traditions like praying to Ganesh that makes Eastern spirituality so pure and true to our origins. The idea that these time honored Hindu traditions are somehow frivolous is proof that you have been corrupted by Western materialism.
View attachment 605262View attachment 605261

 

[based_meme]

The Truth, the metaphysical principles of the primordial tradition, which is mankind's one true religion. Through initiatory esotericism we can trace our initiatic lineages back to it.

What are those principles? What is initiatory esotericism?

see:

You realize that those gods are just idealistic anthropomorphizations of animals that were worshipped, right? Cows and elephants were plentiful in ancient India, as you well know.

 

[Lebinoc]

Complete low IQ cope.

 

[aeoae]

Unironically the West was at it's peak during the so called "Christian dark ages". If I had to live in a Western country at any point in time, I would choose then.

Idk about that one. I think the west peaked right after Alexander the great.

 

[bigantennaemay1]

Yeah, I'll admit I used to be of the mindset of only actual facts and practical real world science matters in anything and you need studies and proof to assert anything. That was back in the days, too, when I watched a lot of atheist content online, including but not limited to the likes of Christopher Hitchens.

But I've realized as I've gotten older that religion does serve a purpose in maintaining the social and psychological health of a society, as well as providing a sense of community to its social members, which is just as important. A lot of the failures I've seen, and especially in the pawns, the rabid leftist SJWs and Twatter keyboard warriors who have so callously shifted the culture of the West to be accepting of the degeneracy that is rotting our society from the inside out all have an incredibly strong disdain for religion and spirituality, especially Christianity. And I don't think this is any coincidence; people are naturally spiritual, and when so many have been convinced to leave and burn down the religious establishment that has brought us this far and been time tested, they need to fill that void with something else, and in this case, it's the toxic and harmful religion of "progressivism," under which feminism falls.

And so now you see them championing this new age religion which has not stood the test of time and does not preach principles and values which lend themselves to a healthy society, nor a healthy outlook on life, and you can see how it has caused our social values to decay and see the results in the rise of unhappiness of those living in the West over the last few decades.

 

[Opus132]

Jews ruined it

Not really. They didn't do the Renaissance, and they didn't invent rationalism.

Jews are guilty of a lot of things but there's a lot of things that westerners did to themselves all on their own.

 

[12 Years a Rotter]

the only things hindering the west are jewish schools of thought, namely marxism and christianity. the further europeans divorced themselves from this, but still within religion, the further they progressed. indian street shitter philosophy can stay in india

 

[Billowel]

Nah it was the Renaissance. You saw a revitalization of Plato and Platonic spiritual traditions long suppressed by Thomism.

doubt there was an actual supression considering how deeply neo platonism affected christrian theology and philosophy.if i am not mistaken the renaissance took deep insipiration in the greeks in multiple arts(archictecture for example),so i could see some greek weaboos being a thing.i mean if you are in a age where you are throwing down god and everything under the book then images of funny greek man comteplating stuff and several stories of them having sex and having mythical encounters seems like a logical step to those disillusioned with the system.i don't know much about the renaissance and honestly i am not interested in it.

Not really. They didn't do the Renaissance, and they didn't invent rationalism.

Jews are guilty of a lot of things but there's a lot of things that westerners did to themselves all on their own.

opus from what i have seen you writing,you don't seem the type to linger in an forum about celibacy.maybe it's because i am judging based on what you have written and what i have seen of your posts here,but you seem to have your shit well put together.pray for me a few hail marys if you can brocel.the older i get the more i struggle.

 

[NoLooksNoLife]

Jews ruined it

 

[ServusLuciferi]

doubt there was an actual supression considering how deeply neo platonism affected christrian theology and philosophy.if i am not mistaken the renaissance took deep insipiration in the greeks in multiple arts(archictecture for example),so i could see some greek weaboos being a thing.

In the East, no, but in the West, from Anselm onwards the West consciously threw away Neoplatonism and replaced it with Aristotle (especially after Thomas Aquinas). This shift is why there are such drastic differences in cosmology and theology between the Orthodox and Catholics. Just look at the Eucharistic theology; in the East the Eucharist is a very mystical, transcendental thing beyond comprehension, connected to God’s Divine Essence. The West categories the Eucharist into accidents and substance and explains what magical formula is required to convert the bread’s substance into Jesus. The former is very Platonic, the latter is very Aristotlean.

i mean if you are in a age where you are throwing down god and everything under the book then images of funny greek man comteplating stuff and several stories of them having sex and having mythical encounters seems like a logical step to those disillusioned with the system.i don't know much about the renaissance and honestly i am not interested in it.

Well you contradict yourself. Apparently Christianity did throw away Plato after all in the West until the Renaissance, where it was a tragedy?

I wouldn’t blaspheme against the First Millenium Saints, most who all stressed the importance of letting your sexual eros flow but redirecting it towards God rather than your own carnal pleasures (Saint Basil and Saint John Chrysostom come to mind). And what shall we say about Saint Teresa of Avilla and her orgasmic angelic heart piercing, where she made messes in Church? What about the tradition of nuns marrying Jesus?

And we won’t obviously talk about how Gregorian Chant’s 8 tones is just copied and pasted from Greek paganism, with each of the tones representing one of the celestial bodies.

 

[Intellau_Celistic]

Nothing new; Pean holes didn't develop decent amount of intelligence.

Wait for the write-up.

 

[turbocuckcel_7000]

we wuz kangz from some greycel in 2022

 

[Billowel]

In the East, no, but in the West, from Anselm onwards the West consciously threw away Neoplatonism and replaced it with Aristotle (especially after Thomas Aquinas). This shift is why there are such drastic differences in cosmology and theology between the Orthodox and Catholics. Just look at the Eucharistic theology; in the East the Eucharist is a very mystical, transcendental thing beyond comprehension, connected to God’s Divine Essence. The West categories the Eucharist into accidents and substance and explains what magical formula is required to convert the bread’s substance into Jesus. The former is very Platonic, the latter is very Aristotlean.



Well you contradict yourself. Apparently Christianity did throw away Plato after all in the West until the Renaissance, where it was a tragedy?

I wouldn’t blaspheme against the First Millenium Saints, most who all stressed the importance of letting your sexual eros flow but redirecting it towards God rather than your own carnal pleasures (Saint Basil and Saint John Chrysostom come to mind). And what shall we say about Saint Teresa of Avilla and her orgasmic angelic heart piercing, where she made messes in Church? What about the tradition of nuns marrying Jesus?

And we won’t obviously talk about how Gregorian Chant’s 8 tones is just copied and pasted from Greek paganism, with each of the tones representing one of the celestial bodies.

there is a difference between supressing and something being substituted.that's what i was talking about.i never read aquinas explanation on the eucharistic miracle,so i can't say much about it,but receiving god himself is the greatest "mystical" experience possible,and god himself is wisdom,so however the eucharistic miracle is achieved,it can't really hurt ones relationship with god,as god himself orchetrasted it. i have read quite a few books by orthodox monks(never on the topic of theology) and the way they treat everything is entirely different from the west,and a lot of it i don't think can be attributed to random philosophy. also i think i took your use of the word supression too heavily,probably shouldn't have made a post



also,i think you misunderstood me(my writing is shit,so that's probably way),because i wasn't talking about plato there,but about the entire ancient greek philosophers.i was trying to say that if you grew dissiliouned with the church or with god,then it wouldn't be surprising that many of them would throw themselves into other philosophical pursuits and other pursuits that they thought would lead them somewhere(which they did,just like the greeks created and explored several philosphical movements),and spend also a great deal of time on sex and women and other wordly pursuits(which many of them did).

i think you thought i was laughing at the greeks,but i wasn't,so i am not going to reply to the rest of your post as i think there is a huge misunderstanding here,and replying would only make things too long.


you said before that you only believed in christ,because you thought it would do good to your own yourself,and that you really didn't care about god.but, from your education,i do doubt a bit that at some point you really didn't have some faith in christ.

 

[racoon4]

 

[based_meme]

What are those principles? What is initiatory esotericism?

@sub human

 

[nice_try]

Western society peaked in the 70s and 80s

 

[ServusLuciferi]

Western society peaked in the 70s and 80s

Pffft

Western society peaked in the 1910s, 20s was the start of the decline.

 

[ServusLuciferi]

there is a difference between supressing and something being substituted.that's what i was talking about.i never read aquinas explanation on the eucharistic miracle,so i can't say much about it,but receiving god himself is the greatest "mystical" experience possible,and god himself is wisdom,so however the eucharistic miracle is achieved,it can't really hurt ones relationship with god,as god himself orchetrasted it.

Plato broadly is more about the transcendent. Generally, that there is a form of existence greater than material reality that is beyond logical category. The fact that human beings are able to naturally tap into universally recognized but non-material linguistic concepts like "truth", "love", "beauty" means that these things exist as an objective reality that transcends materiality, but cannot fit necessarily into perfect material categorizations.

Aristotle is more broadly about working within the material realm to find greater truths.

The East applies a more Platonic conception to the Eucharist - that the transcendent Godhood which can't be fully expressed in words or material concepts is supernaturally transforming the bread and the wine. The East doesn't even bother creating formulas or explaining how it works, because it's so beyond material categories that you can't.

The West tried to apply materialistic categorizations to the Eucharist in explaining how the transubstantiation occurs; by dividing the Eucharist into categories of "what it appears to be" and "what it actually is" (accidents and substance); by analyzing the structure of the Mass and pinpointing what exactly causes the Eucharist to change and when; answering deeper questions about what is minimally required for the Eucharist to transform - namely, Holy Orders, Mass, and proper form, matter, and intent.

Reducing the Eucharist from a transcendant mystery that we shouldn't even bother figuring out to a form of theological science using Aristotlean concepts like "accidents and substance" only speaks to the broader trend of the East to remain Neo-Platonic and the West to become Aristotlean.

The West only saw a revival of Platonism during the Renaissance. Just look at the Monasticism of the Renaissance period; Saint John of the Cross's form of Carmelite spiritually is incredibly Platonic. I also personally think that out of the Catholic monastic traditions, the Carmelites are the most in spirit with Apostolic spirituality, but that's just me.

 

[ServusLuciferi]

i do doubt a bit that at some point you really didn't have some faith in christ.

It's all about intent my friend. Something something "wisdom of the world is foolishness with God".

 

[Opus132]

Something like Neo-Platonism was still present in the west. Meister Ekchart, Dante Alighieri and his "Fedeli D'Amore" (which was an chivarlic esoteric order), Scotus Eriugena or Angelus Silelius.

The problem with claiming that the Renaissance was a good thing because it revived Neo-Platonism is that the latter never had any particular extensive influence and most of the esoteric organizations that rose form the Renaissance to the Enlightenment and forward have something much more sinister about them.

I remember a philosopher describing the rise of all those esoteric and occult organizations in the Renaissance as akin to those flowers in lakes that pop out of the water when they die. From a distance it may look like the lake is teeming with life but the reality is that you are looking at the vestiges of dead traditions that rose to the surface and became bastardized and some even veered towards the occult and the satanic.

Thomism may have had an in hand but the reaction to it seems to have create more problems than it solved, starting with Protestantism.

 

[ServusLuciferi]

Thomism may have had an in hand but the reaction to it seems to have create more problems than it solved, starting with Protestantism.

While I unironically like the Church of England as a historical entity (not as it existed from the 60s onward - fuck no) - only divine inspiration could have produced something like Milton's Paradise Lost, the Oxford Movement, and people like Bishop Berkley - I agree that Protestantism was a cancerous mistake pretty much everywhere.

Lutheranism and Puritanism led directly to the Baptists, and subsequently Evangelical "Creation Museum" style Christianity, which is literally bottom 5 religions created by mankind. Only something truly evil could create something so anti-intellectual, emotionally manipulative, and peer-pressure based.

I also blame Aristotleanism as causing Protestantism. You would be mistaken if you don't think Luther or John Calvin didn't study or take inspiration from Thomas Aquinas and his methodology of analysis; however, they weren't restricted by Church dogma.

never had any particular extensive influence and most of the esoteric organizations that rose form the Renaissance to the Enlightenment and forward have something much more sinister about them.

It was a revival of Plotinus and Greek Pagan values, which is what you view as "sinister". I don't.

I also consider the Enlightenment esoteric organizations as far different from the Renaissance; the former was made to spiritualize the spiritually and liturgically lacking, decadent Protestant systems.

 

[Opus132]

I don't see any Platonic values in movements like Fremasonry, Rosicrucianism and a lot of their offshoots, not to mention Christian Kabbalism which made a lot of rounds back then as well (influencing literal magicians like John Dee, whose influence eventually culminated in the likes of Aleister Crowley).

My argument is not with Neo-Platonism as such (i'm in complete agreement with that school of thought). What i'm saying is that the revival of those esoteric organizations in the Renaissance wasn't all clean. If it had been, the west wouldn't find itself in its current predictament.

For every genuine Neo-Platonic thinker (and there were some in early Protestantism as well, like Jacob Boheme) there were many who didn't fully undertand the doctrines they were spouting, and the roots of the occultism we see today among our elites is the result of this kind of freelance, improvised restoration of esoteric paths some of which were completely dead (like the aformentioned Freemasonry and Rosicrucianism) and could not be resurrected from the dead in quite the same manner they had existed before during the middle ages.

The Orthodox Church of course warded most of this thanks to Gregory of Palamas and the integrity of the patristic intiatic traditions, like Esychasm which is the only one for which we have a name (though there were others).

 

[Unlucky coalition]

Really dumb post, thanks to globalization all the world is the same degenerate and shitty just in different stages the east is dead nigga their birtrates and societies are just because they dont have lgbt march they arent much better

 

[Billowel]

Plato broadly is more about the transcendent. Generally, that there is a form of existence greater than material reality that is beyond logical category. The fact that human beings are able to naturally tap into universally recognized but non-material linguistic concepts like "truth", "love", "beauty" means that these things exist as an objective reality that transcends materiality, but cannot fit necessarily into perfect material categorizations.

Aristotle is more broadly about working within the material realm to find greater truths.

The East applies a more Platonic conception to the Eucharist - that the transcendent Godhood which can't be fully expressed in words or material concepts is supernaturally transforming the bread and the wine. The East doesn't even bother creating formulas or explaining how it works, because it's so beyond material categories that you can't.

The West tried to apply materialistic categorizations to the Eucharist in explaining how the transubstantiation occurs; by dividing the Eucharist into categories of "what it appears to be" and "what it actually is" (accidents and substance); by analyzing the structure of the Mass and pinpointing what exactly causes the Eucharist to change and when; answering deeper questions about what is minimally required for the Eucharist to transform - namely, Holy Orders, Mass, and proper form, matter, and intent.

Reducing the Eucharist from a transcendant mystery that we shouldn't even bother figuring out to a form of theological science using Aristotlean concepts like "accidents and substance" only speaks to the broader trend of the East to remain Neo-Platonic and the West to become Aristotlean.

The West only saw a revival of Platonism during the Renaissance. Just look at the Monasticism of the Renaissance period; Saint John of the Cross's form of Carmelite spiritually is incredibly Platonic. I also personally think that out of the Catholic monastic traditions, the Carmelites are the most in spirit with Apostolic spirituality, but that's just me.

i have read plato and aristotle before,but i don't have the same take as you,but that was not what this conversation was about to begin with.i will say that aristotle isn't exactly working within a material realm.it's just that a lot of the stuff he talks about can be applied to metaphysics as it can be applied to the material world .his theory of causation goes both ways(it works in metaphysics and in the material world.), so he is able to go deeper then most philosophers do.to the eucharist thing i can't comment,as i never read how aquinas went away explaining it.it's also very easy to misunderstand aquinas,and i don't have the time for all that stuff so yeah.


the eucharist is a miracle and it must happen in some way so it's not like it is something unintelligible.to us sure, it might bring great confusion,but man are very stupid(i am one of them i know),so it's not really saying much.I am saying this because i don't see much of an issue with something being made sense of(if the reasoning follows),in fact the more one knows about christ the better, i suppose it might be easier to love the orthodox way when it comes to spirituality but still. at the end of the day the miracle is happening,with ones understanding or with no understanding.

It's all about intent my friend. Something something "wisdom of the world is foolishness with God".

i hope one day,you come back man.the catholic church isn't a very warm place for an incel,but one belongs to it because of christ and not because of man.