>A real metaphysician has to understand the most advanced mathematics of his day. Examples include Leibniz and Plato while midwit metaphysicans are examplified by Aristotle and Kant.
Oswald Spengler said this in volume one of decline of the west. Is he correct?
Yeah, but it’s important to point out that he’s not saying someone who isn’t a mathematician can’t be a philosopher. Metaphysics and philosophy are not synonymous.
He describes how the focus of philosophy after the great metaphyscians turns to ethics and politics.
And socioeconomic concerns generally, yeah. I can’t really disagree. But he also makes the point elsewhere that in the end that all of these are just religious faith with deity/deities stripped out.
Holy fricking shit, rare Spengler W?!?
imagine how ugly the homosexual who made this is
That's more what I feel when I see your post. Even when I see some /leftypol/ meme from an ecosystem I'm not a part of, representing ideologies or people I hate, I still think lol they're having fun, good for them I'm glad they have their own silly memes and such.
imagine how beautiful and inspiring the legend who made this is
I know all of them but top second from left, and bottom first from left I don't recognize. Anyone care to enlighten me?
The top one is Junger
Top one is Junger, bottom one is Yockey. IMO Yockey and Teddy K are the least interesting people in that chart.
Just realised I should've probably been a bit more specific. The full names are Ernst Junger and Francis Parker Yockey.
>Instragram/Snapchat smile with teeth filter
Cringe
imagine how average-looking the regular guy who made this is
>Is he correct?
No, since mathematics concerns the manifested cosmos and doesn’t attain to trve metaphysics
>No, since mathematics concerns the manifested cosmos
Most math has nothing to do with reality. For that matter none of metaphysics has anything to do with reality
Aristotle was one of the greatest metaphysicians. So he was wrong about that. But you should probably know mathematics if you are doing metaphysics.
Silence papist
what the frick IS metaphysics?
a table
The things that are between the earthly realm and heaven.
Metaphysics is the study of first things.
Here is a talk on metaphysics with Fr. Deacon Aninias who is a deacon in the Orthodox church and also a professor of philosophy.
BEHOLD! Metaphysics!
Kant didn't know math? Didn't he do astronomy and geodesic studies as well?
He's right about mathematics but wrong about Kant, he knew his math and even contributed a bit to astronomy. Aristotle too. A better example would be Schopenhauer, who had truly embarrassing takes on math.
Kant knew mathematics but he didn't know advanced mathematics like that of his contemporary Euler.
it would have been a real b***h to try to keep up with Euler as a contemporary of his. if Kant knew Descartes and Newton then he was probably as well educated in math as you could reasonably expect any non working mathematician to be at that time.
According to Wikipedia, Kant lectured on math, physics and philosophy. He was one of the first to give lectures on Geography, one of the first to attempt explaining earthquakes in terms of natural phenomena, and came up with the nebular hypothesis.
I was browsing tor and while watching that stuff all of a sudden realized that all females are bawds by nature, from the moment they born they instantly act like spoiled hoes. There's no such a thing as innocence. Just comparing them with males, the way they pose, trying to sell maximum out of what they have, and what they realize has value to males, they know their holes are valuable. Males, compared to them, are designed by nature as cattle, stupid apes, shy and easily ruled. And of course they don't know how to pose, it's just not in their nature, they can't give loose look, can't show their bodies with that mood and vibe as if they are doing something that has value, the way females do, their entire nature has one and only aim in their genes-to show off, to sell their stuff for max price, to manipulate, to constantly look for benefit in return for their fat bags and holes, which all makes them worse then most filthy scum hustlers, by nature, israelites or gypsies. No wonder through history they were treated like filth, unlike now, when entire male population is worshiping their shtholes and mouths that are used as cumdumpser
Metaphysics is an entirely nonsensical and obsolete field. While it is already cringeworthy that metaphysics fails to answer its own questions, it is even worse that metaphysics fails even harder at phrasing its questions in such a way that they become meaningfully answerable in the first place. Upon closer examination all of metaphysics appears to be wordcel confusion ("language games") dating back to a primitive late bronze age understanding of the world propagated by ancient Greek midwits. The most legitimate answer to questions of "existence" (a horribly semantically overloaded word with no distinct philosophical meaning of its own) is ultimately and unironically "It just is, okay?"
>It just is ok?
What do you mean by 'just is'?
>The most legitimate answer to questions of "existence" (a horribly semantically overloaded word with no distinct philosophical meaning of its own) is ultimately and unironically "It just is, okay?"
That's just a massive metaphysical presupposition. Almost every person arguing from an anti-metaphysical viewpoint or anti-philosophical one makes a prior metaphysical assumption.
This is one of the key points of Spengler's philosophy, which he never quite spells out directly. Everything the human soul comprehends or achieve is done through metaphysical processing. That is, everything a person thinks or does is based on their own comprehension and experience of Being. Consciousness itself is a metaphysical processor. All art, science, and philosophy is a reflection of central metaphysical insights. This is partly why metaphysics, as a discipline, is more often a description of a culture's own understanding of being in the world. Everything a person is, was, or will be, is metaphysics. Everything a person thinks is metaphysics. Because this is their consciousness, their life (which Spengler defines as a thing 'becoming') in face with reality. In this sense, we make reality. Not in the subjective, but by our instinctual processing of reality in the soul (and we can replace that word with whatever we wish, the brain, the mind, the heart, the psyche, etc.)
Heidegger ripped this off from Spengler, and one familiar with Heidegger can see those shades. In some ways, he brings out something more obscure in Spengler.
>everything is metaphysics
>taking a shit is metaphysics
>sucking a dick is metaphysics
>see, philosophy is relevant, okay?
Delicious cope. Literally grasping at straws.
Not a good argument. It's like saying taking a shit isn't biological, and because taking a shit is so mundane and vulgar, it can't possibly have complex causes related to the digestion system, therefore biology is horseshit. It's a dumb argument and you're a dummy for liking it.
So you admit that defecation does not require metaphysics?
The metaphysical presuppositions of taking a large dumper is truely profound bucko.
Even taking a shit is metaphysically loaded.
An Indian shits openly on the street. You and I find that disgusting, because we have lots of cultural presuppositions about shitting, and what it means to shit. We think shit is simply gross and shameful and needs to be neatly transported elsewhere. The mere scent of shit is embarrassing, even in a public toilet. An open air street shitter has such a different cultural viewpoint, which itself goes back to metaphysical presumptions, that even the act of taking a dump is done in a way alien to us.
Can you back that up with citations from vedic philosophy?
>Spenglerians are so enlightened, they can vitalize the very act of dumping shit from your ass with rich symbolism and significance
Spenglerchads, I kneel.
>This is one of the key points of Spengler's philosophy, which he never quite spells out directly.
>He doesn't say it but he believes in it, I read his mind
kek
He's incorrect because math just in the 20th century has grew more than in all previous years combined. It's literally impossible to even understand a small subset of it, and there's so many specialists today
Explain. How was mathematics different in Spengler’s time a hundred years ago?
Several new theories were developed and there are now subsets of mathematics that require at least 2 or 3 years studying them to be somehow knowledgeable of them. In France, you usually spend 2 to 3 years in "classes prépa" (undergraduate) to get a good grasp on basic mathematics, then you spend another year studying general mathematics before specializing in a very precise subject (i.e. complex or real analysis, lie algebra, group theory, applied mathematics...)
Isn't metaphysics supposed to study what's beyond axioms and stuff ? Then mathematics would not help you, probably.
It's entirely different, Spengler died in 1936 when some concepts essential to modern mathematics such as spectral sequences or the entirety of category theory haven't been introducted yet, even the notion of homology was in its early stages of development at the time of his death. In some way, 1940s-1960s for mathematics are the akin to 1900s-1920s for physics, entire new fields of math appeared that no one really thought of before, and those fields take up most of the research effort to this day.
Also back in Spengler's time there were people such as Hilbert, who were familiar with all the mathematical developments of its day. Now there are no such people.
>It's literally impossible to even understand a small subset of it
Speak for yourself, brainlet. I understand most of it and I'm not even a genius.
Mathematics is a lower science than Metaphysics. it would be a good idea for a metaphysician to have a working knowledge of Mathematics, but not strictly necessary for him to have one.
Metaphysics is a topic exclusively owned by mathematicians and physicists nowadays. Philosoplebs have been cucked out of their own field. You need to know at least formal logic, quantum mechanics, relativity, stochastic processes, game theory, theory of computation, information theory etc etc before talking about metaphysics. If your idea of metaphysics relies on a computable universe with local hidden variables in absolute time then it is simply factually wrong. Philosoplebs are not even aware anymore of the established facts contradicting their bullshit.
Facts
I was going to effortpost, but suffice it to say that you are an unwashed, barefooted moron not easily distinguished from an insect.
you have the metaphysical presence of a duck
Challenge a mathematician - he will respond with a proof. Challenge a scientist - he will respond with facts. Challenge a philosopher - he will respond with an infantile insult. This is the pinnacle of a 3000 year intellectual tradition. Embarrassing.
That’s because philosophers already solved metaphysics more than a thousand years ago. If you know you know.
Instead of wasting so many years on this stuff I do wish I'd learned art instead
Reminder that the anons in here will support being “into math” while also defending Nietzsche. What a fricking joke.
I don't defend Nietzche. To be blunt, I actually find it annoying how some anons treat Nietzche as the end of philosophy and anything else is supposedly just a so-called "cope".
Fr. Seraphim Rose refuted Nietzche.
Also, Nietzche was not even consistent within his own worldview.
I don't recognize any of those Funkos
>the archetypical Nietzscheian Last Man, pictured in his bedroom
Math is the best gauge for actual intelligence.
>cites Spengler
ngmi
He's not an allknowing guy but he has some good insights
>He's not an allknowing guy
He's damn near the closest thing we have to one.
itt: people who don't know anything about philosophy, mathematics or metaphysics beyond the wikipedia summary discussing those topics
Fr. Deacon Ananias is a professor of philosophy.
https://www.youtube.com/live/NXLGcVCtT88?feature=share
>implying you can't learn all of it from Wikipedia
Yeah and plato is literally a madman rambling about the most insane stuff and was famous only for defending a pedophile.
I hate all these "complex" philosophers with moronic concepts, metaphysics already is a bit far, but stuff like dialectics is just some useless bullshit that had for its only success brought about moronic marxist and their near religious pov on history. Half of philosophy is built on bullshit by morons that only write shit because it sounds like an intellectual treat, which is, may I remind, the goal of dialectics, where the thing you're looking for is just a good intellectual wank, which is good, in the realm of the arts and novels, but which is actually considered by a lot of people as serious academic works. Just attend philosophy courses, you will see, half of people speaking are completely insane and imcomprehensible, I remember a friend showing me his teacher, who wrote stuff like "on the expressivity of rocks" which, is about rocks and how people are jealous of their silence or stuff somehow, there was obviously 1000 of texts the likes of this, and there are many more academic professors like this
>I remember a friend showing me his teacher, who wrote stuff like "on the expressivity of rocks" which, is about rocks and how people are jealous of their silence or stuff
Kek
>LOL IF A WRITER DOESN'T SAY IT DIRECTLY, IT DOESN'T EXIST
>AUTHORS NEVER WRITE ESOTERICALLY OR USE METAPHORS
Remember that part were Spengler said he supported trans rights? It wasn't said directly but he said it esoterically.
>The decline of the West, which at first sight may appear, like the corresponding decline of the Classical Culture, a phenomenon limited in time and space, we now perceive to be a philosophical problem that, when comprehended in all its gravity, includes within itself every great question of Being.
first page. I've studied Spengler for years and have read all of his works. It's apparent to any scholar of Spengler that he wrote extensively about metaphysics without ever proffering a formal and direct treatise on the subject. If you want to be a zoomer pontificating about books you've never read, does it have to be on this board? There's plenty of other places to shit up.
If you are going to insult me, then the argument is over you dumb Black person.
The argument was over when you demonstrated you haven't read the source material.
I have read the source material you stupid israelite Black person.
You haven't even read the nutrition label to the diet coke you're swilling, you bloated fartbag.
Your mother is a great prostitute. All the black Black folk run a train on her.
You're an emulsified blob of brown mass to your computer chair. You have stubs for fingers and an overworked annelid for a dick.
Your father is a coward of a man that raised an impotent failure of ason.
Your father was black and he didn't raise anyone
i can't buy leibniz in my c**t, hes not treated as a philosopher
I read Volume 1 expecting it to be about the rise and fall of civilizations, but it was just a bunch of chapters of Spengler talking about plants, plastic, and Gothic cathedrals.