Time

Nsdap tried to stand against time and failed

im here.

Hitler lost the war, and now the Racial Question and the Jewish Question are constantly in jeopardy of being answered due to "muh Hitler muh Holocaust." Now, naturally, we have a bit more of a nuanced perspective than that, but Time isn't just being carried on our shoulders. He objectively failed.

Im talking about politics here. If you are so arrogant to think you can bring eternal truth into governance as a whole then you might as well become a lefti who still thinks communism is inevitable due to its inherent truth if we just wait long enough for automatisation and KI as comissar, or try often enough until Venezuela doesnt fail anymore.

But is the right utopian?
Most of us accept that wars and struggle, inequality in wealth and intelligence are realities you can try to harness for something good, or circumvent a bit not to get rid off totally and that trying to do so will end in desaster.

If objectively true statements do not form the foundation of government, that government will fail. I don't see how someone can be so retarded as to not comprehend this.

I dont think you can do this 100%, or else you could find an ultimate morality or form of governance by scientific means.

1+1=2

Math is literally the science of objective statements. Through objective statistics, we HAD the best form of governance in existence. It was called the first 3/4 of the American 20th century. Then kikes started to infiltrate our damn near perfect system because its existence stood in the way of their retarded plans.

Not at all. The right historically just tries to preserve whatever's left, fails, and then keeps repeating the same song and dance over and over again to no end. The only "right-wing" leader to ever try to enact change in search of utopia was Hitler, but he was centrist more than anything, as there were plenty of people to the right of him at the time (Ernst Junger, Julius Evola, any of the Conservative Revolutionaries.)
Correct. Hierarchy, spiritualism, and the principle of struggle are all at the fundamental core of right-wing philosophy in all it's forms.
The disaster was losing WW2 and everything that entailed.

While I wont denie that the american system of the early 20th century was one of the finest of its time, it seems a bit farfetched that the justification for the bill of rights did not also stem from some subjective sentiments which were shared by the vast majority of americans.
Its a bill of rights, not a mathemathic exercise after all.

Seems like we roughly agree then.
Did you made the OP to see out of curiosity if there were people with differing viewpoints?
Because it doesnt seem like you believe the right as we understand it today is activly seeking an eternal truth which can be apllied to all aspects of society.

I'm pretty much in the same boat.

After reading some Evola, then jumping to hermeticism, then to European New Right authors I see very little of absolute truth you are referring to.

The issue with (especially contemporary) right wing thinkers is I think that it relies on pluralism of forms in order to sustain nation-states and that's where this "subjective" stance comes from (meaning: "we all different and have different worldviews ergo different states"). I find this to be cuck's way out and much prefer radicals instead. But in the end, as far as the core question goes, I'm not sure.

Agree nearly completely with both of these statements. My own personal discovery of traditionalism came about after a lot of years of abject nihilism. That nihilism ended through noting the world to be absurd (lotta LSD helped me there), and then from absurdity, one notices that given the lack of INHERENT meaning this gives rise to the ability to create the meaning one adheres to in one's life.

Though a truism, the phrase "life's about the journey not the destination," ends up holding a lot of meaning. Life is about self-improvement, doing right by others and by yourself, and living the fullest one can (traditionalism being the optimal way to live to create the most amount of personal satisfaction). After you live the first part of your life by this, one realizes that you will eventually die, and the only way for the world to retain your existence and continue the "meaning" in your life is to have kids and pass on esoteric knowledge of life.

sec

No, the problem was liberalism and democracy fundamentally. The Torys were right. America would probably still be pretty based right now if Washington crowned himself.

I'm glad that even a couple people on 8/pol/ have gone down the same spiritual and philosophical path that I have, even without me having to be here for a little over a year.
Kind of, yes. I went on a weird sleep bender (7:30pm-4:00am) and woke up in total existential dread. Time has been my main objective to study for a couple months now, as I've found that the study of cyclical time/eternal return can answer for literally everything.
You're right, they aren't seeking it at all. It seems like every cycle in history pits conservatives defending an even more and more left wing position over time. The right-wing of 1000s of years ago were the Pagan primitivists, then the Christian Kings, and now the secularist libertarian conservatives. These constant changes have made me question whether or not there is an eternal truth to be discovered at all, but I'd rather ask the question than make up my mind all at once, as I've regretted doing that in the past.

Welcome aboard!
Hermeticism is interesting. I have The Hermetic Tradition by Evola, and about 4-5 months ago went on a bender where I read The Hermetic Tradition and then watched Harry Potter to highlight for myself how much Hermetic principles even shine through pop culture. Hermeticism just seems like a background of the Western occult throughout history, but I find the most truth in Hinduism personally. However, they aren't necessarily mutually exclusive in terms of cultural application.
Also, European New Right is basically just rebranded National Socialism (Guillaume Faye's concept of Archeofuturism) without any goals, so I never took much time to study things like old Counter Currents. Btw, Rest in Power Jonathan Bowden.
It's a sign of the times, not much more to be said. Personally, I've come to the conclusion that nothing can tangibly be done to save the White Race or most of civilization, and we will come out of the Kali Yuga on top in aristocratic guilds and networks, as opposed to trying to fix anything. It seems to me that the more people try to fix all of this shit, the worse it gets.

I live and behave day-to-day practically like an Egoist at worst, or Active Nihilist at best, but think like an Evolian Heroist and Traditionalist.
This is a pretty yuuge sentence to de-compartmentalize, but I'm happy to say now that I know what you're talking about (2 years ago when I thought I was redpilled, I wouldn't). We only have to create our own meaning for life in the present epoch, as we once had the answer via Traditionalism, and lost it. If you asked someone midway up the caste system in an ancient society "What is the meaning of life?," chances are that they'd have a good answer for you. Now, we've seemingly lost it. This sort of thought pattern is what makes me believe that there is an eternal truth, but judging by Time's constant scaling back of the goal posts, I haven't been sure today.
Plato figured this out thousands of years ago. It's almost like "the redpill is the bluepill," because humans are meant to live life, not question it.
Amen. Traditionalism solves the metaphysics question undoubtedly.

Bump with OC I made a while ago for concurrences or disagreements

Given that it's a short read I recommend Kybalion (notice that it's authenticity is in question, but it's a good read either way). It is certainly true when they say that once absorbed you will see it everywhere (I especially recommend reading Kybalion and Cosmotheism by WLP one after the other because parallels are insane). Currently reading Hermetic Tradition and after that I intend to go into Corpus Hermeticum and hopefully then I will be able to pass final judgment onto hermetic teachings.

I too agree that Kali Yuga has to take it's proper toll first as our foundations are too faulty to build anything in direction we envision. My bigger fear almost is that it won't happen at all and that progress-believing people are right. The technology certainly casts some doubts into this Traditional way of thinking and in this direction I can only see proper machine-driven totalitarianism. Should current order of things cast space colonies before the crash there will be no going back and there will be no proper Satya Yuga for man. There will be for the AI, though.

I like it, but the hair not as much. An age in MsPaint.

It's on the Amazon wish list (read: I don't have time or money to read books that I don't already own anymore and I don't want to read online pdfs.)
It's true not only of the philosophical principles of Hermeticism, but the mythological traditions and symbolism of Hermeticism as well (Philosopher's Stone, swords, dragons, regality, etc.). Also, I don't necessarily agree with cosmotheism/pantheism, as I believe Gods are more tangible than being present in everything, but only slightly more tangible, as we still obviously don't know their truest nature. Hinduism basically states (I could be botching this, I'm a dharma green) that it's pantheon of Gods is an underclass of something even greater, and that makes the most sense to me.
A lot of people complain about Evola being like a textbook to read, but his content is actually amazingly fun to absorb once you start having religious experiences and hints at transcendence. You should do what I did, read Hermetic Tradition and watch pop culture like Harry Potter or Adventure Time to notice the parallels. I haven't been giving enough attention to religion/spirituality as of late, tbh.
If Time is just an infinite line and everything in Hinduism is wrong, then I don't want to be right. At that point I'd literally just kill myself, and haven't done so yet after learning more about reincarnation and Death (tl;dr: Suicide is like Groundhog's Day, but your entire life).
Technology is what will return us to the Satya Yuga. Once we build up too much of our lives around it and the world's governments collapse, ultimate chaos worldwide will ensue. It's like the newest episode of Rick and Morty, where Rick resets the galactic government's currency value in a high-level computer from 1 to 0, and then the entire system collapses, causing control over planets to cease almost immediately. Also, I believe that divine intervention will happen, because there are so many in-explainable values that commanded Tradition on a primitive level in the Satya Yuga that only a God could fix peoples' shit.
We are the AI. Nah, but, I don't think we're gonna make it to space. I'd like to read more into the Hindu perspective on it.
P.S. I only fixate on Hinduism as it is the world's oldest preserved Indo-Aryan religion. Even if Dravidians are the maintainers of it today, the truths stay the same.

Not bad. I'm basing it off this, btw.

When people wrongly capitalize the word "Truth", they are only interested in the complete opposite of it. They only speak lies. Especially ivory tower philosophers and "theologist" con artists.

archive.is/1fXaY
I like archiving my OP'd threads and cringing at them later.

I'm referring specifically to the Truth as an all-encompassing enlightenment, something that is found via spiritual transcendence and understood on realms that we can't comprehend at a base human level. The capital "T" is for context on how big of a concept we're talking about here, not that I'm attempting to push one specific "Truth" as propaganda.

Get a tablet/kindle, it's a good investment.

Although I wish I had all them books on my shelf. It doesn't really matter though, none of that shit can be easily obtained where I live. Going off for Evola and sleep. Have fun m80, really glad to see that there are still few people actually reading books left on this board.

I know what you are talking about. That's the problem. You are taking truth and hyping it up to something that you want to worship. That never ends well.

So are you saying that people who want to worship the truth are the same as people who speak lies and are interested in only, not merely lies but specifically, "the exact opposite" of the Truth? You're vaguely hinting at something here.

Also, as I saw in another thread where an user argued with a Freemason, there's a difference between seeking truth and worshipping truth. There's no reason to assume that anyone here has made the conflation.

Yes.

No. I'm straight out saying it.

It's quite fascinating how all that time spent playing video games helped me grasp Hermetic Tradition all that more quickly. Most western style RPGs are rife with the hermetic mechanics within them, some by chance, but many by design. Approaching metaphysics has been all that more simple and intuitive with having played Elder Scrolls games (some medieval mystics like Meister Eckhart make much more sense once you know of CHIM). Hell, even japanese fiction that takes a western approach (Berserk, Fullmetal Alchemist etc) contains hermetic truths as the basis of their fictional worlds. It was truly something to read the passage about "cutting off the wings of the dragon mid-flight" in order to reach the "garden within" and it's a scene almost completely out of Dragon's Dogma where fighting the dragon is more a lesson than an actual fight, the dragon more a teacher than a foe that must be brought down, and the dragon's death revealing the true face of that reality. Maybe that was what primed towards these esoteric pursuits to begin with - these vivid realms of fantasy that seemed to hide something tangible within them.

Then you have Jung, who in his Red Book dives head-first into his own bizarre myth and at first doesn't know if he's insane or actually received divine wisdom, and at some point just stops giving a fuck and begins LARPing some sort of a warrior wizard that wears chainmail hidden underneath his plain clothes so that the snake that he has enchanted to have his soul does not harm him, chats with Satan about how humans fucked the world up with their search for knowledge and so on. It all sounds like a plot for a video game and yet, it also feels intuitively real. These mythical thoughtforms being a constant companion throughout the existence of humanity is no mere coincidence and in accordance to the principle of as above, so below, the worlds of fiction seem to have the same weight upon the truth of the world as we perceive it as actual history and science. Hell, sometimes even more so.

It's such a fascinating ride and I partially stumbled upon some key elements of this journey right here. It is always interesting to see similar people like me going through similar journeys. We each have our own path to walk, but this is the bonfire around which we all gather to tell about what we've seen.

Only God knows the truth, and he ain't telling us. The more conscious we grow, the more godlike we become.

The problem is even worse elsewhere (Twitter, Instagram, anywhere that entry-level normies lurk). Thanks for participating!

What is your premise? That there is no eternal truth, and seeking it can only bring about bad things? I'd like you to explain why.

Awesome post. I've had a deep feeling my entire life that there has to be something more to those that are written off as "crazy" for having ideas that they can't easily explain. The Red Book is one of the biggest redpills I've ever swallowed, and I'd recommend that to everyone on Holla Forums.
>tfw I want the proverbial bonfire of 8/pol/acks to be real but we have trust issues in terms of organizing and stepping away from the anonymous platform

Only the dead know the truth.
I wouldn't use the term "we" because humanity as been on a steady path away from God, but there is certainly something to be said for initiations and sacred rites for individualist aristocrats such as ourselves.

archive.is/SJIIZ

Atkinson - I'm tired of all this jewish shilling on Holla Forums for the Kybalion. The Kybalion was created by one William Walker Atkinson. Atkinson was a failed armchair occultist, more concerned with useless theory than actual practice. He was a fool through and through, Atkinson wrote dozens and dozens of books, many of them rehashes of earlier ones. He even adopted various pseudonyms such as "The Three Initiates" in case of The Kybalion, and fucking called himself "Yogi Ramacharaka" in order to peddle his Hatha Yoga books. Whatever useful information in his books is drowned out by meaningless drivel, endless padding and disinformation. Whether through idiocy or maliciousness, he corrupted the concept of "The All" into jewish monotheism, and contributed to the "Mind of God" meme that we have floating around occult circles today.

The concept of "The All", a primordial, creator force of infinite power is a Jewish idea. Monotheism or the idea that everything came from a conscious being is a corruption of the concept of Demiurge; the unconscious, unthinking, unfeeling force in the background of the universe. The thing that keeps everything together. Basically the humming vibration in the background of the universe. It's completely UNCONSCIOUS, just like atoms. But Jewish teachings took that and attributed a personality and intention to the being. The All is just like that. And it is, case by case, simply YHWH. We now have the path of RHP(Right Hand Path) in occultism where fools seek to assimilate themselves into "The All" which is simply nothing other than soul death and loss of consciousness.

Also - ancient cultures all understood that there was no overarching "creator God". They all understood that its the elements that give shape to the Universe as a whole. Only with the inception of Judeo-Christianity did this wicked and corrupt notion come in play that "muh God created everything!" despite it going directly against the fundamental laws of nature.

Lastly, as an amusing anecdote, Smiley on /fringe/ used to (and still does) shill hard for the Kybalion and many other books by William Walker Atkinson. Where did that get him? Smiley just became a delusional psychotic and ended up in the psych ward.

Same experience here mate. I recently played through Dragon's Dogma and man, the stuff with Grigori was something else.

Thanks for the heads up, but I think there can be a lot to take away from Hermeticism on the whole without specifically the Kybalion, at least for contemplation and highlighting parallels between many religions. I agree that monotheism and attempts to centralize the vibrations of the universe into something tangible enough for a Wicca feminist to understand are bad ideas, and I actually got a lot of push-back from my friends for similar reasons when first delving into Hermeticism for fun. However, studying the cultural overlap between multiple societies and their respective religions that can be tied into Hermeticism is harmless (see: The Hermetic Tradition by Julius Evola).

Final bump

Probably. Look at Plato.

The "microwave bursts" we keep detecting from deep space are actually very high altitude nuclear explosions.

take the cosmic horror pill, choose the fifth wheel
hplovecraft.com/writings/texts/fiction/sk.aspx

This looks sh00ped
I can tell by the pixels

That's not really a convincing argument since I've seen posters on both 8/fringe and fringechan (RIP) shit on Smiley for being an inept occultist. Smiley's failure then doesn't seem to be a reliable indication that his beliefs are false.

What is the distance from this truth you speak to another established as existing object?

Statements and objects can be described by the adjectives, true and false. "Truth" is merely a reification.

Learn what truth is before trying to discuss it.

It's an adjective-derived abstracting noun that has no tangible referent, no different in from from happiness, beauty etc. As a (misnamed) idealist, I hold that talking of such "things" without including what the adjectives describe (in the case of truth, statements, gold, people's behaviour, etc.) is kind of ridiculous.

I disagree with you and you assume you are right and not willing to discuss. Fair enough.

Is there a distinction between "the truth" and "what's true" or between "do you swear to tell the truth…" and swear that your testimony will be true"?

I'm reading that book right now, and I haven't seen the All described as a God at all, the book even says it is foolish to ascribe any human qualities to it, or to worship it in any form. It's simply described as the underlying substance or everything.

In any case, are there any books like it that you could recommend?

Okay, thanks for playing. Kill yourself.
>>>Holla Forums

If you have to ask this question, you definitely don't belong here.

Eternal truth exists but it changes with every moment. Anybody who clings to it gets stuck somewhere in the past.

There is no eternal truth but the iron laws of nature.

Humans have evolved a physiology and psychology which are adaptive to our environment.

Holla Forums's promotes natsoc because it is required for any sort or healthy fulfilling life. Living as an isolated individual without history or culture or people, eating fast food and coke-a-cola, porn and vidya addiction, mass demographic replacement, feminism and emasculation: this is what the (((capitalists))) want because it turns humans into compliant wageslave consumers.

All philosophy comes second to building a proud ethno-state, because this is in compliance with man's needs

I never said that. I said it's an abstraction. True and false are absolute. But they describe things (statements, mostly). What things/statements are you talking about?

Welcome back TRSodomites!

There is a problem, though, with some self-referential statements, for example, is the statement, "I can only tell lies" the truth or not the truth?

I would actually recommend anons to partake of some LSD if they can
if you have the philosophy already in your head, all the religious doctrine and ideas it can really result in some terrifying eye opening and sobering experiences
i had a religious experience using acid once, too much acid
resulted in experiencing some things that reminded me of Orthodox Christianity, Buddhism, Nihilism and Jungian archetypes
it was terrifying and it took effort to bring back an element of sanity to what I was experiencing
all in all though I can totally understand why acid/LSD would be used in MKULTRA brainwashing
the suggestions it can put in you, make you doubt what you believe was truth

SWIM has taken a lot of psychedelics for a long time, and has recently cut all drugs.

They'll knock the boots off a bluepilled normie and have brought many people to Holla Forums, but I'd recommend Holla Forumsacks already here not touch that stuff unless they really know what they are doing and have an experienced guide (another person irl).

I recommend ayahuasca, and not lsd or shrooms, because its a fucking miracle medicine that will clean you up. Shrooms cause panic attacks that put anons in the hospital, and lsd these days isn't lsd at all but fake poisonous chemicals from china.

Don't fuck yourselves up anons.

yeah i did acid but it wasnt pleasant
felt like my head was ringing internally for about 22 hours
a big problem ive noticed is the combination of weed with psychedelics
id never do that again after i figured out weed plus hallucinogens becomes paranoid delusions with the hallucinations to justify them

I believe one portion of THE capital "T" Truth is the evolutionary responsibility every human being to the reach their maximum potential. Meaning being physically fit, knowledgeable, etc. I haven't meditated on this all too much, but I want to hear other user's opinions on this.

Not if you make it yourself user

You are an idiot.

Nihilism is meant to be overcome. Nietsche explained nihilism in his work so he could talk about how to destroy it and you want to wear it like a fucking hat?

How stupid can you be.

The only "objective truth" is the will to power. Nothing less and nothing more. I'm tired of explaining this to you sad teenage faggots.

...

That's pretty much it. Except it's about genetics - you are mortal, but you will live on in your offspring. So you should not only advance yourself and help your kin and blood reach the maximum potential, but make sure that the next generation surpasses you and dominates the inferior nations and races.
This is the only objective truth of human existence and the core of national-socialism.

which according to Socrates was the only way a mortal could ever achieve anything close to immortality
by being immortal through your bloodline

There are the Universal Natural and/or Creational Laws, about which mankind does not yet know much. No one is going to tell us what these Laws are; we have to figure them out for ourselves. At this stage we only know what very broadly what the concept refers to: a set of laws to which all life subscribes, follows to its own evolutive benefit. These laws are always Natural, always Creational, and by definition Universally applicable. As an example of the Universal Natural Creational Laws, consider the tendency towards sexual dimorphism in all higher life.

Eventually we will come to understand that these Laws are as important and immutable as the laws of physics, and will devote much of our industry towards discerning them as objectively as we can, but that is 6-8 centuries away just yet. For now, rest assured conservatism is on the right path, just as liberalism is, as long as it follows the Universal Natural Creational Laws, however inadvertently. Whenever we deviate from these laws, that's when we get into conflicts and trouble.

I think the Universal law has to do something evolution/evolutionary forces. In particular r/K selection, with K types being far superior to r types. I'm starting to believe everything in life essentially boils to down into a conflict between r and K types.

That's exactly what I'm referring to. A mortal can only live on in his children, in his tradition and his nation (in the traditional sense of a monoethnic blood-related society).
When you walk the European homelands you should think about the infinite line of ancestors walking the same ground as you do, struggling, building, fighting and conquering so their children could live on to surpass them and give birth no their children and so on, until you were born to carry their will. All your ancestors are alive in your blood and are looking at you every moment. You have a single job - to secure the existence of our people and a future for european children

And that is why what is being done to our world by the Jew is more than genocide, every time a european racemixes or is turned into a tranny, thousands of our heroic ancestors die again, for all their suffering and struggle turned out to be for naught.

Man LSD is not going to "red pill" anyone. That is not to say that it can't be a useful tool at essentially reformatting neural pathways but its not magic that will intrinsically reveal truth. How LSD-25 and other psychedelics essentially works is that it confuses receptor sites in the brain so that you essentially "see music" and "hear colors". However our "Lizard Brain" aka our limbic system can never entirely be consciously be aware that it's under the effects of hallucinogens, therefore any emotional trauma you experience is indistinguishable to real trauma. So while it can be used to face your demons and be helpful in the right environment it also can be destructive and devastating. Not to mention people tend to become highly receptive to brainwashing techniques while on the drug.
smh tbh fam. The name Deadhead is laughably apropos and somewhat prophetic reflection of the shallow hippie ideology.
fucking cucks

be

Finally a possibility for some quality posting, I was getting worried with the entire shitshow.
As in 'universal truth'? Because that's a far harder conclusion to reach. Nietzsche understood that the world has multiplicities of truth, which means many perspectives endlessly conflicting with one another in favor of one perspective being most prevalent over others. Every perspective have the need for 'will to power', every perspective wish to dominate all other perspectives to become 'absolute truth'.

Okay now something to clarify because I can see a lot of liberal pseudo-intellectuals trying to obscure what is said here: multiplicity is NOT pluralism, nor is it based on subjective relativism. With multiplicity of truths you both have stronger and weaker wills, there's always conflict, negations, where different truths dominate each other. When a liberal professor talks about pluralism, they are talking about different perspectives, all inclusive, all being of equal valued. See a problem here? Well you should. If this was true, why the hell (((cultural marxist))) go out their way to subvert the dominant culture? Because whether subconsciously or not they realize weaker perspectives/truths (by coloured people, by feminists, trannyism, multiculturalism, liberalism in general, etc) cannot achieve equal value to that of the dominant perspective, truths that are most prevalent over others and thus considered more objective. Their natural value is weaker and have little in terms of will to power.

This is why the left tries so hard to censor the right and subvert it. It's about having full control over the competition and making sure those stronger competitors don't participate so you always win through 'fairer' means.

Anyway, when someone talks about eternal/universal truths I think about the truth that is most prevalent, consistent, most reinforced by natural means.

Nietzsche was a retard. There is only one universal truth. Because you can't change the laws of universe and nature or spin them in your favor.

I suggest you forget any philosophy past 17th century, it's all Jewish.

Read again, retard. None of which I said is about changing nature or universal laws, nor did Nietzsche thought that way. The left tries to subvert these truths in favor of their own subjective world view.

Where do I start with Nietzsche, lads.

I've red it. The truth is singular. There are some smaller truths, that the universal truth are composed of, but there aren't conflicting, because they are all based on the same laws.

The universal truth is like a tower, the universal laws are it's foundation and the basic truth are the bricks. In no way or shape can the bricks conflict or compete with each other, because they all have the same foundation and support each other to give birth to a new ultimate form - the tower.

His notion of "conflicting truths" is what gave birth to the the whole jewish leftist agenda of perversion of truth.

Bear was CIA?

Acid isn't a redpill in and of itself, but it certainly strips away all the preconceptions about the world that you have grown up being indoctrinated into. In the aftermath of a trip you assess reality clearly without any of your former beliefs coloring your perception of it. The result is you rebuild your entire weltanschaung feom the ground up based on empirical observation. This redpills the shit out of liberals who have grown up in an cultural marxist indoctrinization program.

Also have you read Dragons of Eden?

you are almost literally asking for this video

youtube.com/watch?v=X77dkiDpBoM

Conflicting perspectives is more like it. Physical laws themselves are singular and cannot be conflicted, but perspectives on what is true is alterable to change. Hell even nature is prone to change (life to death, winter to spring, evolution as an adaptation to changes in the environment) but it's dictated by a cycle of changes.

He was not talking about the sciences or physical laws themselves, he was talking about what shapes our philosophy, our perspective of what is true and not. He gives an very intrinsic understanding of how humans think or how they like to think.

...

...

No. Truth doesn't change no matter the perspective. That's what makes it truth, by definition. The sky is blue - that is a basic truth. You can try to pervert it, by stating that the sky is white from your perspective, because it's cloudy where you live, but this is a lie, because above the clouds the sky is still blue. There is only 1 truth.

Philosophy is based on the physical laws, because philosophy itself is an attempt to explain and rationalize them.
Creating self-serving imaginary models is what marxism does. Avoid marxism and avoid Nietzsche.

I started from Beyond Good And Evil, but I think it would have help to start from The Gay Science. He has a lot of ideas which branch from there in later works which helps to clarify them, and it seems helpful to treat the pursuit of knowledge with a sense of gaiety and newfound innocence.

I think Nietzche is bit of a cul-de-sac that a lot of people get sucked into, in pursuit of an absolute explanation, when the reality is that Nietzschean philosophy by definition embraces nihilism and thus trying to escape it leads you to the same problems he had. See

To overcome this, we must revert to the base philosophy and see things in terms not of positivist assertions and post-modern deconstruction, but the realization that Truth (or Logos, as Greeks termed it, the "Word" that in itself carried the meaning of purpose and essence of truth and thus was the creative force of the universe) is an absolute value and it has a positive and meaningful presence in physical universe. Truth is the 1 to void's 0, truth is the basic principle of reality that exists in opposition to falsehood, imaginary reality and theories that exist in minds of men, but do not posses the quality of Logos.

National Socialist concept of "Blood and Soil" hearkens to that principle, through assertion of material reality in culture and life of the Volk and the Truth that springs from that relation between material life and the culture it produces, but not in the consumerist sense, but a natural one, where falsehoods and artifice cannot exist because they are not alive and aren't life-sustaining.
With that in mind, let us look again at Logos and how it comes to be expressed in culture and life. With affirmation of Truth as the ruling principle of life, qualities such as honour, loyalty, honesty and generosity arise naturally, as the acceptance of life-giving principle necessitates your own reaction in form expressed by those qualities. When you accept what you are and accept the reality around you, it becomes impossible to be dissuaded or changed in mind and opinion about those qualities and thus they become inherent parts of your life.

One of the reasons why Truth ennobles us and is such a powerful force is that affirmation of principles of reality gives us power over it. While those entertaining false images can only react, those accepting the Truth become proactive creators of their own reality, in which they further their own conscience and secure the existence of their own blood - while vast majority of people never goes that far, most will agree that love for their family and safety of their children is paramount and they subconsciously act upon the Truth imprinted in their DNA to do anything that secures their progeny. This is where subversion is the strongest, as it seeks to uproot the Truth and make it hidden from the public, as it is the one thing that can never be sold or controlled.

It really isn't. You're thinking of the actual sciences themselves, which is base on a self-evaluating formula to empirically proves these laws and theories as consistently as possible. Philosophy is truly our mammal brains attempting to understand our place in the universe and its meaning to us, which is something we cannot empirically evaluate. Do not conflate human perspective with objectivity, we're not the fully rational animals we give ourselves credit to.

Yes! And what motivates these faggots' perspective? What motivates these type of people to find homage in marxism and leftist ideals? Often it's a perspective driven by their own weakness and envy for others success. They want to believe this as truth, and they wish to impose it as so. Funny enough they fail everytime because their 'perspective' is incompatible with reality.

It isn't marxism. Nietzxhe even stated that he saw socialism (marxism in his time) as another religion of pity that of christianity. He sees them as weaker people who don't want to participate in struggle or the dangers of life, who romanticize the underprivilage as the truly virtuous. Nietzsche doesn't want these "effeminate" and underprivilage people to be the dominant perspective (as he seen it coming), he wanted an more ubermense perspective, one which represents growth and power. You would know this if you were familiar with his work.

Please post here more often, we need more volk like you.

Also note he didn't refer his ideas of the ubermense as universal truth either, but a far more healthier perspective that helps elevates society and it's people.

The truth is, knowledge of some incorporeal "truth" matters little in the world. Animals and most sub-races of humans carry on and prosper without either the capacity or the slightest will for what philosophers call truth. What matters is power. If these notions grant you and your race power and survival, then they will be true. If however you and your notions become extinct, then the world would move along its path without philosophers, and the universe will not even blink. Which one is true remains to be seen.

That's half of it. Philosophy is valuation. Not a bland 'what is' , but 'what matters' , and 'what ought we do'? . And as Hume showed, we can't get an 'is' from an 'ought' .

We are players in the world, neither gods or detached observers. This should mediate how we see the pursuit of truth and what roles it plays in the shape of our lives. Some truths are hidden from us, it is not ours to know the game before we play it.

My advice: seek what works, be true to yourself, don't cut apart the body and the soul, not even with a malformed blade of false reason.

I agree with this. People need to believe in idea of truth more than truth itself as a way to affirm the actions of it's people. Logos as a tool helps evaluates our decisions and better reinforce these actions.

Nihilism may be a good personal journey for those individuals strong enough of overcoming it, it helped me re-evaluate life as a path for greater things ahead (which is why I devote my beliefs to National Socialism), but the mass will always need a sort of safety net to fall into pitfalls like these.

*safety net for pitfalls like these.

Sciences all stem from philosophy and until a certain point in history were the same thing.
Philosophy exists to research and regulate things the modern sociology, psychology, psychiatry and education are trying to achieve and explain - why, how and to what extent does a human live, what is the world he lives in, how does he interact with the world, how does he conquer his demons and how does he advance himself and achieve greatness.

No, the animals have the inherent awareness of the universal truth. It's about passing on your genes and helping your blood achieve it's maximum potential.That's what every animal does unconsciously.
The subraces of humans don't prosper, they suffer.

Power is useless, because it's temporary and it's worthless,because it's just a tool. Your whole argument comes down to "the hammer is the ultimate truth, because it helps me build the tower. The tower itself doesn't matter, it's all in the hammer".
You should really look at the kikes, because they are the race that follows and understands the universal truth. It's very rarely that they seek power. Do they have any real power? Of course they don't, they only deceive the ones who do. What they seek is presence. Why? Because without a concept of universal truth the mightiest power in the world can be talked into acting against it's own interests.

Oh, and you are a nihilist kike by the way.

Here are some personal truths for me, I study computers at uni and I do a lot of math, and I have also read almost all of the books from knee cha:
This is one of the highest truths there is. Vae victis, or 'woes to the conquered' was a Roman saying, 'victor's justice' is also a popular phrase, I'll cut the post short by simply saying that troughout whole sociology/history/humanities/soft sciences, might makes right is the axiom, the founding principle, the self evident, the non-contradictory.
All of it comes from violence. Sure there's this court and that court and this notice and that warning and this appeal and so on, but at the end of the day violence is what enforces all of it.
Whites are the mightiest, therefore you should prefer whites. I do understand that some whites are retards, and some shitskins are actually smart, but at the end of the day, if you want to be the most correct statistically, you must prefer whites.

I put a space here to separate this one from the rest of the post.
FASCISM
Symbol of fascism is a giant fucking axe. No fuckery here. Axe symbolize might. Fascism is a system, that unites everyone (therefore achieving maximum might) into unbreakable bundle of sticks, with a giant fucking axe emerging from it. It is in an individual's greatest personal interest to wholly unite himself into this bundle, achieving the highest total overall might possible.
Basically a personal moral compass. New man is a common feature of fascist philosophy. Ubermen for knee cha, Aryan for nazis, doesnt matter, it is an ideal which improves individuals who strive toward it, and also the whole that is made out of individuals.
All false because we arent all equal. Duh. You cant vote a mighty army away, it's going to plunder and rape its way across your democracy unless you have more might.
Just a book that basically says what I am saying.
Corporatism. AKA capitalism, but you are not allowed to hurt your own people. Example: you can run a food business, but cant poison your own population. You can run a water business, but you cant sell at a loss till all competitors are out, and then put outrageous price on a fucking water, after you have successfully monopolized the water.
Nuclear family. Nothing wrong with it. Father makes all the decisions, because he also makes all the money and can probably lift more than wife and children.

FASCISM

I'm saying philosophers can speak of towers in ivory till their genes go into non-existence, an argument won't stop a shitsking with a hammer from smashing your head.

So is life.
Who's life? And to whom is the worth measured? Maybe it's just a misunderstanding. If I would have said 'life' instead of power, you wouldn't call it worthless. Is not passing your genes power? You mistake me for a shallow hedonist.

Kikes understand people, and the power they wield is only trough people.

You can talk a white man into castrating himself. Look at Origen. Thousands were swayed by the 'truths' of Christianity into not passing or their genes. You can't talk a nigger into shit. You can try and a jew into acting against its interests, but that's gonna end in shit too. Why? Because subhumans and animals know their interests before they have the vaguest idea of universal truth. Their interests are their truth. Whether it's universal or not is a non-issue.

It's this ideea of universal truth, that you can look trough the 'eye of God' and see once and be all set for eternity that tricks 'disembodied' smart white men into acting against their better instincts. "There are some ideas so absurd that only an intellectual could believe them.”
One thing Hitler did in schools is put an emphasis on physical education. He knew the importance of instinct and strengthening the link between mind and body.

Real philosophy is always practical. It's kikes like Nietzsche talking about imaginary concepts, nihilism and power, despite being cucks in real life.
People like Marcus Aurelius and Socrates always lived everything they spoke about.

The blood is eternal.
No, the life itself is worthless, the life is a clay you work upon.

They don't wield any power. All they do is pervert the truth, and when the people don't see the truth they stumble about blindly. When you show people the truth, the kike perishes.

Of course you can. A nigger is the simplest puppet there is. They have been acting against their own interests for decades, because some Jew told them they are oppressed and everyone is racist.
The simplest example is how the Jew talks the niggers into kicking out the white farmers, then dying due to starvation.

You can't talk anyone with a concept of the universal truth into anything. The liberal cucks and the christians don't have any conception of truth. When you don't have it, you can be talked into anyhthing. Because when you are born in the darkness and don't know what sunlight is, you are easily deceived by a jew with a candle.

Okay that's correct because like the Greeks a lot of early stages of society the two were inseparable.
Philosophy exists to research and regulate things the modern sociology, psychology, psychiatry and education are trying to achieve and explain
No. It's the other way around. That would certainly help your argument more if so. Otherwise you'll have theology at early stages dictating what is true and what discoveries to make. Also do note that sometimes epistemology are realized later to be wrong and be later corrected.
Okay that's waaaay apart from the sciences. Sciences help gives you observation and raw data of reality around you, its limits, what you do with this knowledge is all according to perspective.

But they're aware unconsciously?

Uh that's not universal truth, let alone universal, that's just instincts to procreate. Are you saying that instincts are universal truth?
Because there would be numerous instincts or "truths" if so.

A bit irrelevant now but w/e.

A tool… that is worthless…but it's a temporary worthlessness.

This is getting pretty incomprehensible, almost reaching hysteria.
You just said power is useless. And for a position that is temporary inherent, the kikes seem to have a long streak of power for some time now.

It is exactly the what the universal truth it. That's the basic reason for your existence, that's your only realistic way to immortality and that the only realistic way to get human closer to god.

That's an example of why it is useful. Any power you have can be used against you.

I suggest you read some greek and roman philosophers first, before spouting your braindead kike propaganda.

So universal truth is nothing more but the need to procreate?
Sounds pretty black pilled.

You mean evolution. Evolution isn't only guided by reproduction but also a way to weed out weaker genes. To base it on nothing but reproduction is way over-simplistic. But again, you're entire premise of universal truth is over-simplistic.

So it's not useless then.
Which means it's far from useless.

I hardly believe you read those either.

"Truth is subjective"
"Truth is Universal"

Look at these two constructs… two extremes. Now ask yourself, "does anything exist in one extreme?"

Life is a flux (Logos). One minute it's true from your tiny insect sized perspective, the next minute it fluctuates and changes.
This is what's called perspective. Doesn't make it false. Just means reality is fluid.

Nietzsche's recent autopsy found his skull had brain cancer. His dad died in the same manner.

Logos was a "word" because Heraclitus used an obscure technique of not naming the thing itself which would attack more meaning that wasn't suppose to be attached (the way Jews attached Jesus to "Logos").
The meaning of the word is a flux.
A flux, like a wave, has a low and a peak… this can be seen as cause and effect.

Truth then can be defined as our limited perspective that allows us to ride these waves.

Blood holds millions of years of eternal truth within your genetic coding. It's millions of years of good animals and people - ancestors developing through hardship the eternal truth of life – "you live till you die".

And living is essentially motion – so pick a direction and live.

You can trick a nigger because they have underdeveloped higher faculties. They think kill-whitey = more gibs, then it isn't so and they starve. Still their lover instincts work fine, and as a result, they don't face demographic extinction.

A white man (maybe nips too) is the only race for which the reverse is true: overdeveloped reasoning, atrophied lower instincts.
They don't do stupid things for gibs or shekels, they do stupid things for 'justice' or 'equality' or 'grace' . All concepts requiring high mind to comprehend, and working instincts not to fall into. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

"Truth" is their justification. Their fanaticism. What they defend and what they use to defend themselves against the "truths" you might seek to give them. If they can be talked into 'anything', then truth is not something they can be talked into.

It's always liberals that are so epistemologically 'thin' . "Shit has to be done because Truth™" .
Right-wingers (real ones, not cuckservatives) aren't quite so dogmatic. "Now I may not know much about Truth™, but I know shit that works. And Truth™ didn't seem to work that well last place it was tried, now, did it?"

As you know from Aristotle I presume, there are different types of knowledge/ knowing, and with all this modern fetishising of "episteme", we are seriously lacking in "phronesis" .

Sauce? Or better yet book rec…

Perspective does not change or affect the base reality. Material facts do not change their quality whether you are aware of them or not, but they will be an obstacle that you will not overcome if you are ignorant of them and try to fight their cause or effects.

What you term as "fluid perspective" is exactly the type of constructivist and post-modern thinking that denies solid reality in favour of "perspectives" that all seek to undermine reality in blind ignorance of their own lack of substance - its like trying to crack a rock apart by directing mist at it - it will disguise it, but the effect lasts only as long as the mist holds.

Quantum theory posits that observation affects the observed sets and that this in results feeds back to our own minds and wishes affecting reality indirectly. However, this kind of thinking ignores the fact that it is the nature of observation and recording that defines the reality and solidifies it by giving us the data about what is, thus giving it a creative force.

This is an empty truism that disguises the nature of human life, which has more going for it than mere existing. We recognize the reality around us and thus are able to recognize that everything rests on truth of solid matter and solid facts and effects proceeding from interactions with that matter. We surpass instinct in active knowing between good and evil and active knowing that we can improve, thus grasping the Logos.Life is a flow only if you jump into the river of apathy, waiting for rocks to smash you when your time comes.

Please correct me if I'm wrong here user's. Wasn't Nietzsche a existentialist? Isn't existentialism much like nihilism the total rejection of universal truths, but where exestentialism splits from nihilism is where you essentially come t o the conclusion of your own pathway to follow to in life unlike the nihilist who still sees no intrinsic purpose in anything? Sounds kind of a bit too liberal( not as despondent as nihilism ) to be honest, I always thought Comte with his positivism and religion of humanity where somewhat like an ideal way of life for a red pilled person like myself. Please tell me if made any mistakes user/'s I always seek new information

Posts Jap pedophilla

Bump for answers and respondes

If I give you a big bowl of homemade Italian macaroni and cheese, but you are lactose intolerant, it will change the reality. You're getting caught up in extremes again.
Shut up. Not everything is a mechanical response to Leftists, user. I know what the fuck I'm saying. I'm saying hard truth, solid truths, like the vacum of space for example, are still based on fluid shifts in perspective because we are human beings

blah blah blah

Boy, you're just full of Holla Forums talk aren't you. It's like you don't read outside of this site. Live till you die isn't a truth or an -ism. It's just a directive.

Evil is a control mechanism. It's a meme for slave cults. It's time to move "Beyond Good and Evil" and stop worshiping Judea-Christian philosophy and pretend forms

You're not using the term Logos right, user. You sound like an asshole. Rocks bashing your head and apathy and praying to Jesus won't change the flow of the river… you're still getting dragged onward.

Don't wikipedia your life away, user.

Also, fucking will to power. That's not "your own wishy washy "whatever man", path. It's a foundational behavior in all that exists. A rediscovery of the heroic instinct in man.

WILL YOURSELF TO POWER AND BECOME THE OVERMAN!

It is the struggle against corruption and nihilism, for the sake of potential and innocence.

It doesn't change the reality. It's a bowl of mac and cheese, the only thing different is you.

It also doesn't stop you from eating it as you may not know you are lactose intolerant, or at the same time you may of never seen mac and cheese before and don't know it can be eaten, so you don't eat it.
That doesn't stop the definitive reality that there is a bowl of mac and cheese on the table, you interactions with the bowl depend on your perception.
So yes base reality is definite, but how you interact with reality is entirely subjective.

It does change it. Because mac and cheese is perspective. To an ant, it's a huge slime mountain of starch and animal fat.
To who? To me it's a cup.
You're hung up on the extreme position of "it's absolute truth, untouchable so I can base all my actions on it!" But that's not how life works. The Universal truths are more phenomenons than hard Platonic forms. They move.

I didn't wiki it though I do I used other snyopisis sites and stuff, will to power seems like a very imperative state to be in. Is the overman a similar concept to the ubermensch ? Also thanks for the link user I'll check it out

Unbermecsch is Overman.

And yes it's a bowl by your definition, a big one actually.
This is my 2nd and last post since you are clearly not worth the time, hopefully any lurker can see what an utter shitshow postmodernism is.

There is truth but it is generally qualitative rather than quantitative, hence the inability of mathematics to express or discover it, so much as explains symptoms of truth and describe existing conditions.

The truth is also holistic, meanwhile so-called intellectuals who champion the Enlightenment and other forms of liberalism try to delineate all things, and in doing so once again arrive at the belief that truth is quantitative.

The Right in politics is absolutely the pursuit of Truth, whereas the Left will often CLAIM to pursue the truth, yet do so quantitatively. Make no mistake, they seek only to describe what exists in a way that cannot discover the truth itself.

Nationalism is human instinct, it's evolution, merit, rational, logical, yet at the same time, romantisized.

It's the human spirit incarnate.

Just playing devil's advocate, but in that sense couldn't it be argued that some globalists are nationalists as well, just globalists for the "human race"? Nationalism being an unavoidable instinct and all.

In nations such as India and Indonesia (and even in Japan to a degree), the opinions that you describe are not necessarily mainstream at all. Carl Jung, a relatively 'mainstream' and 'respected' figure who outlived Hitler by 15 years, wrote positive things about him as well.
My mother, who isn't really 'red-pilled' much at all, but is religious and conservative, readily admits that 'Hitler did a lot of good things in Germany' whenever the subject is brought up. Don't give up hope so soon.

As a physicist, I would tell you that science is but one field of study that is predicated on a certain view of the world and certain presuppositions. It is very useful at answering certain questions.
HOWEVER, the materialist perspective–whether (((Communist))) or (((Capitalist)))–that leads to basically claiming that ANY question can be answered by (whatever you define as) "Science", and that any questions that science cannot answer are not worth asking, is purely cancerous.
Humans are flesh, but we are also spirit.
Philosophy is the foundation of maths, which are the foundation of the sciences (physics -> chemistry -> biology -> psychology if you wish to include it) in a hierarchical structure. This is the natural order of things.
The greatest non-pozzed and non-Jewed scientific thinkers such as Blaise Pascal, Isaac Newton and Nikola Tesla understood this, and didn't try to do away with the entire concept of truth through scientism or sophistry.

Neuroscientist. I had the same realization.
I remember coming across this study that had been performed to try to understand 'love'. And I just kept reading it with this sense of total absurdity. The study didn't find much that was terribly profound or meaningful, or even very new or interesting. The results were largely a rehash of previous results. The problem with science is that it is fundamentally reductionist and purely analytical. It breaks everything down to its pieces, when most of the interesting stuff happens beyond that level.

I realized that a poet, or painter, or songwriter could create a work of art and give me a better answer to that question than any scientist could. And I feel this great sense of sadness that art, high art, is so nearly dead. Worse, it loves on as this broken materialist zombie.

Checking these glorious trips, and you both make some interesting arguments.

Mostly agreed, except that the Corporatism/Capitalism you promote seems to be of the (((Mises)))/(((Rand)))/(((Friedman)))/(((Rothbard))) variety.
Remember that Socialism, WHEN IT IS JOINED TO NATIONALISM, is not pernicious, but actually beneficial to the citizenry as a whole.
The Jewish game is usually to take something good (socialism/community responsibility) and then turn it into something harmful (Communism).

Right wing politics are an attempt at the creation of Truth. It is the will to conquer the unknown and make it known rather than submit to chaos. It is the realization that the idea of unity requires the idea of separation. Wholeness requires parts. Thresholds must be imposed on the world in order to know it.

Agreed.
Whenever you're told something that uses 'science', 'studies', or 'research' to undermine a belief you have that seems obvious, or to completely change a current paradigm, or to usher in some new form of 'progress', you should ask yourself the following:
- Before this 'advance' is made, am I (or are others) incapable of 'coping' with reality?
- Is this 'progress' absolutely necessary for me and my people?
- Will this benefits of this 'technological innovation' outweigh the costs or unintended consequences?
Some examples that you can use to get your friends thinking about this sort of thing:
How did we live our lives without or before:
Google
YouTube
Wikipedia
Facebook
Android/iPhone
…and here are some more items of a different type:
Women's Suffrage
1965 Hart-Celler Immigration Act
Massive vaccinations
Autism/Aspergers diagnoses and medications
No-fault divorce
Abortion (Roe v. Wade)
Gay rights/Gay marriage legalized
'Hate crime laws'
etc., etc.
Basically, you want people to get over what C. S. Lewis called 'Chronological Snobbery' or assuming that 'newer is always better' and that 'progress is inevitable' and that 'you want to be on the right side of history'.
These harmful attitudes always allow Leftists to win by moving two steps forward for every one they take backwards, and therefore creating the new 'status quo' in the image of their old agenda, before pushing things even farther towards the direction they want.

I think you touched upon a very important matter here, as it goes to the very root causes of what propagates liberal slide towards cultural dissolution.
Traditional virtues have been under continous assault for more than 200 years now, starting with French revolution, and earlier with Enlightment, that in opposition to Renaissance, took upon the mantle of "progress through novelty", which still follow us today. The "modernising" that we are constantly undergoign ceased to be a project of enlightening and improving humanity, but acquired the characteristics of a marxist permanent revolution, where change itself is a goal, not what that change brings about. "Progress" has been fetishised and made into a an item of constant adoration, disregarding the problems it causes.

As such, classical philosophy and virtues are derided as they rest on a foundation of unmovable reality and thus cannot be challenged by ephemeral ideas of the liberal revolutionaries. The drive to abolish classics, history and high art is there to squash the material expressions of our own awareness of reality and truths it contains, to bury it under a mound of absolute relativism, where everything is a negotiable abstract and thus nothing can be used as a weapon against the liberal.