/lit/ - Literature★

ok

>>8376 (OP)

actually thank you.

there are many things i want to read before evola. and it looks like the kind of things that i might not exactly take seriously. but thank you…

>>8399

i've read ride the tiger and started on revolt against the modern world and shit doesn't get more serious than this

>>8412

i didn't mean to offend you.

it's just that evola's reputation for esoterism sort of turns me off.

>>8416

Unless you've got some decent religious studies under your belt, know what esotericism actually is, and do not like it, I wouldn't knock Evola.

Esoteric practices have nothing to do with talking to mystical beings, worshipping the devil, or any other stupid thing that has wrongly become associated with esotericism today.

Esotericism is all about achieving knowledge of self (the philosophical concept). Nothing more. And it's completely compatible with atheism and science.

It's traditional spirituality, and it's not to be confused with the self serving nonsense that passes as "spirituality" today.

If you're interested in learning why modern society is so sick, and why materialism, hedonism, etc. etc. etc. is so bad, reading Evola's esoteric books will serve you well.

They will provide you with an objective base knowledge of what makes society tick, and what makes it decay.

>>8423

Full Definition of esoteric

1

a : designed for or understood by the specially initiated alone <a body of esoteric legal doctrine --- B. N. Cardozo>

b : requiring or exhibiting knowledge that is restricted to a small group <esoteric terminology>; broadly : difficult to understand <esoteric subjects>

2

a : limited to a small circle <engaging in esoteric pursuits>

b : private, confidential <an esoteric purpose>

3

: of special, rare, or unusual interest <esoteric building materials>

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/esoteric

the dictionary definition says you're right, i guess.

Looks like your typical sacred stuff. It's the same old pitch to change yourself to fit his ideas, instead of cutting them entirely.

>>8423

>this whole post

top fucking kek man

>>8482

how's that? nothing he says is wrong

>>8490

He doesn't know what esoteric means. He defines it as a quality of Esotericism instead of a simple adjective that means "difficult to understand". Never mind that Esotericism is a broad term applied to many philosophies deemed rejected knowledge.

>>8376 (OP)

thanks

>>8423

>And it's completely compatible with atheism and science.

You can't be serious

Have only read Revolt Against the Modern World so far. Will read Men Among the Ruins next! As Bowden said, the most Right-wing thinker of all time. Fantastic stuff!

>>8423

>>8428

The best way to define esoterics is hidden knowledge, or knowledge kept hidden behind some barrier. To a Latin illiterate European peasant in the 1100s, the Christian bible was esoteric knowledge. To an Aztec in 1500s, the concept of a musket or a cannon was esoteric knowledge. To the people of India and later their British colonizers until they uncovered the Thuggees, it was esoteric knowledge as to why people would disappear at a certain time of the year. To a Melanesian islander in the 1940s, what B52 bombers were and why they brought aid was esoteric knowledge. To the entire world ,except for a small group of people secretly doing the research, atomic weaponry was esoteric knowledge.

Which means

>>11269

It is completely compatible with atheism and science since there are many things that are not fully understood by anyone, or are understood but kept secret and the barrier being entrance to some sekrit club, see: Christian priests having a monopoly on who was able to learn to read Latin.