Yo Misc,

I'm not picking on the brah, but this post is a very common rhetoric that I've increasingly seen/heard from Black people and White people regarding racial issues, on social media like the misc...'Pro-black'/'Black conscious' activists say that kind of rhetoric to black people...

White Nationalists/Far Right activists say that kind of rhetoric to white people...

To encourage them to engage in racial tribalism.

Essentially encouraging people to let current affairs dictate their values and ethics.


Anyone is free to argue otherwise, but IMO that kind of 'response to current affairs' approach to values and ethics, IMO is honestly at odds with the overwhelming majority of masculine and spiritual philosophies throughout history.

From the Hellenic and Roman masculine traditions, the most respected thinkers (E.g. Aristotle, Plato, Epicurus, Marcus Aurelius, etc), to Eastern masculine traditions (e.g. Budo, Shaolin, etc) never advocated letting the state of the world dictate a man's values and ethics. Masculine philosophies have always been big on integrity or living for an ideal, regardless of the current affairs of the world.



From Christianity, to Sikhism, to Buddhism, etc, the spiritual traditions have never advocated letting the state of the world dictate a person's values. Integrity, even in the face of monumental societal pressure (e.g. Christian being murdered by the Roman empire, Sikh Gurus being beheaded, etc) is something that is praised and encouraged by spiritual philosophies.

Letting the current affairs of the world dictate your values and ethics means a person has a lack of integrity, lacks an ideal, or is not aware of The Divine/The transcendent.I am of course not stating that someone can't or shouldn't revise their values and ethics in light of new information, experiences, and reasoning, but I am saying that simply using current affairs to determine ones values and ethics is neither supported by the masculine, nor spiritual, philosophical traditions.

In spiritual philosophical traditions a person is called to unite with the eternal e.g. The Logos, The Dharma, The Tao, etc.

In Western Masculine traditions a man is called to integrity, regardless of the dictates of current affairs or society.

In Eastern masculine traditions a man is called to live for an ideal.

In the Western Philosophical traditions, Reason and Religion, or a combination of the two, have been what has been respected when it determining one's values. Never simply by looking at current affairs, and responding to it.


I just wanted to share my thoughts, because I see far too many young men acquiescing, or bending their values and ethics, to current affairs... And older men encouraging them to do that.

Friendships and Camaraderie can transcend race, if you focus on character, an ideal, or the eternal, rather than race. I think we need more men encouraging that.




Examples of The kind of Masculine Philosophies I'm referring to...






(Edit: I wanted to say that Mishima was a very spiritually and mentally ill person, but IMO his life philosophy is a good example of blueprint of masculine philosophy, albeit one that doesn't have a higher spiritual philosophy guiding it, so it's ideals become about violence and death.)


Please share your thoughts (please, don't launch into racial demographic tirades, I'm asking for thoughts on integrity, values and ethics regarding current race politics).

Europe for Europeans
Asians for Asia
Africans for Africa
Orcs for Draenor

I’m trying to understand your point in the most concise manner.

Is your point that various belief systems have a shared belief to stand strong in adversity and do what is correct to your beliefs despite societal pressures?

The lion's outside of your door
The wolf's in your bed
The lion's claws are sharpened for war
The wolf's teeth are red
And what a monstrous sight he makes
Mocking man's best friend
When both the wolf and lion crave
The same thing in the end
The lion's outside of your door
The wolf's in your bed
The wolf, he howls
The lion does roar
The wolf lets him in
The lion runs in through the door
The real fun begins
As they both rush upon you and
Rip open your flesh
The lion eats his fill and then
The wolf cleans up the mess
The lion's outside of your door
The wolf's in your bed
The lion's outside of your door
The wolf's in your bed

Ah, my bad, seems like I didn't explain myself well. (Though what you summarize is part of my message.)

My point is that spiritual and masculine philosophies, have never advocated moral relativism/allowing current affairs to dictate values or ethics. In contrast, we now have black and white groups encouraging young men to use current affairs to dictate their values and ethics.

I've honestly regularly seen from both 'pro black' and 'pro-white' groups things like 'look at how we are being treated, we need to look out for a our group interests like everyone else does'. Rather than taking a more principle based approach to ethics and politics. It's pure emotionalism.

I honestly respect one guy who I've followed for a while who is a pan-European literal fascist, but that is because I know he dida lotof reading and philosophizing to reach his conclusion. I don't see that with a lot of young men, gung ho into racial politics.

I mostly agree, assuming i've understood your point properly (i did skim read)

Your world view/life philosophy should be structured in a way that allows you to move through the world correctly, but the current political trend is at odds with this.

But then, it's almost a collectivism vs individualism argument at this point. If you follow collectivism ideology, then current affairs, especially with the rise in identity politics is going to have an affect on your personal philosophy.

Essentially, it feels like people these days for the large part, at least in the Western world don't have a concrete value system to rely upon and find their way in the world which is why they follow current affairs like trends and alter their values constantly. This is probably, incidentally a factor in why depression and feelings of hopelessness are so high, people don't have a concrete personal philosophy/value hierarchy to rely on and guide their way through life and thus don't really know who they truly are. It's partly also why people hold onto their beliefs so strongly; having what you see as a violation of your value system is psychologically stressful, and if you take it further to conflicts in a value system (which is bound to happen when your values aren't really yours but cherry picked values from current events), you end up with cognitive dissonance which is psychologically taxing and can drive people insane.

Whilst I believe religion has a lot of problems, I also feel like this is a consequence of moving away from religion and towards a 'science' based world... the religious framework helped many people build value systems they could rely on to navigate life and taught them how to act properly and that (in my opinion) was the entire purpose of why humanity built religion in the pre-science era (to aid understanding and navigation in the world). Whilst we shouldn't be dismissing science, completely discarding religious values in lieu of science means we forget why they emerged in the first place and kind of lose touch with what we've learned (in the deepest sense, in some ways) about being human and how to properly act over the past centuries. To me, religious texts are just a series of fables that contain moral messages on how to act properly in the world, rather than literal stories about omnipotent beings.

Nietzsche summed this up well when he said 'God is dead, and we killed him'.. i believe this is what he meant... the death of traditional values.

I might just delete everything I wrote, and put the above, lol.

You got my fundamental message.

Without principles, people just sway to propaganda and current affairs. Race is a very easy button to push for a lot of people.

well i'm glad i got your message, i'm sure it wont stop the misc turning this into a race thread though. i'd rep but i'm on spread

Part of the problem is, people aren't really taught this stuff. Building a value system and personal philosophy is really of the upmost importance to extract meaning from life, and to move forward properly, and really most people have no idea what their beliefs actually are, they just follow trends and/or are easily pressured into beliefs. At the end of the day, this system of values is really all you can rely on to move through life and have some kind of real identity.. it's especially important to have this framework in place during the darkest moments of your life to fall back on, otherwise you're finished. I truly believe as humans we NEED this value system, and the phenomena you're describing is one of the most fundamental reasons for the depression and mental health issues in the world today.

I understand what you’re saying now.

I agree, post-modernism has led us down to the path where we're at now. Society has gotten away from holding an objective truth that is utilized as the standard upon which everything else is objectively measured. Since we operate in a post-modernist society, everyone has their “truths” and well, since all truths are equal under post-modernism, there cannot be condemnation for particular actions or held beliefs.

What I find interesting about post-modernist is their intellectual laziness, where they don’t even examine their core belief, that is everything is subjective. However, in order to make that claim, the adherent has to make an objective statement, and don’t realize that it is self-refuting.

I think what it comes down is the lack of critical thinking/logic in education. It’s a subject that is no longer taught in primary or secondary school, and a student isn’t exposed to it unless they enroll in a philosophy or symbolic logic class in college. Then when you think that only 25-30% of the population has a college education, and an even smaller amount of those that have attended college but never took a philosophy/logic class, we’re probably only talking about maybe 5% of the population that has an educational background in logic.

I agree with you. I'm a converted atheist, but I do think religion should come back unless we can find a suitable replacement. It seems like valuing decency, modesty, being kind to your fellow man, is fading a bit. Vanity is at an all time high right now. Me me me all the time is no way to have a healthy society. We have to be able to come together. One thing that would help imo is just more town festivals everywhere. Everybody coming out supporting local businesses, mingling with people near them, having fun with friends and family. That kinda stuff is important. We need more fellowship everywhere.

Post modernism plays a part, but i'm not sure it's the root cause. Post modernism to me, seems a natural consequence of throwing away the traditional moral framework humanity has created over thousands of years (i.e religion), in favor of an objective, science based view of 'truth'.. instead of trying to find a way to combine the two. It's also why we see so much Nihilism these days too, for exactly the same reasons (and is one of the natural paths from post modernism). Neitzsche noticed this over 100 years ago.

I'm not suggesting for one minute we all need to be religious.. i for one am not.. at all. At the same time, i believe completely throwing away the religious framework is not the answer, as we lose all the wisdom that has been woven into it over thousands of years.I'm athiest-agnostic also, but i think when you scratch away the surface of religion it's not just some belief in higher beings... it's humanities attempt over thousands of years (before the scientific method) to build a system of values that helps them navigate the world properly and find some meaning that really goes quite deep, based on thousands of years of observation. Many of the stories while OBVIOUSLY not true in the literal sense (don't mean to offend anyone - it's my opinion) contain messages that are still powerfully relevant today and we all know deep inside are true and the proper way to live... for example the concept of the logos. Completely throwing away religion risks losing these important lessons. Science gives us immense power in a lot of ways, but it doesn't give us values.

tldr; i agree, and the key part of your post is 'unless we find a suitable replacement', and we really haven't. There doesn't seem to be an obvious way to derive values from science/facts... and then you get into the debate about which facts you choose to form the values, or which facts you choose to make more relevant when constructing your values... so it really doesn't seem that objective in the end. I really think right now religious values are the best we have, at least for the masses.

Many people are capable of forming their own personal philosophy without religion but it usually takes some period of self discovery/introspection and actual yearning for knowledge and wisdom... but i don't think the masses as a whole are capable of this, which is where the religious framework is a great substitute.

your comment is intellectually lazy. there is a multi-dimensional spectrum of theories regarding "truth" and "morality" and the degree to which they are foundational. some philosophy professor might believe in constructivist morality- that morality is "real" BUT only insofar as we make it so. or notions of intersubjectivity with respect to human intuition as such etc etc. there are notions of materialistic (atheist) objective truths which logically (and consistently) follow and, indeed,emergefrom human intuition back-propagated.

what i take issue with is that you imagine you know anything about "post modernism" (a pathetic misnomer, of course) and THEN call other people intellectually lazy.

its like people like you read some things and get to an answer that makes them comfortable and then call everything else stupid.

Very good point.

It seems like a mixture of christianity and philosophy before 18 deeply instilled in me the importance of striving for the ideal or the eternal, rather than on trends or current affairs.

I have to agree with Tim Ferris and Alain De Botton though that most philosophers aren't interested in practical philosophy, and it's mainly an academic and theoretical based discipline. Yet the popularity of people like Jordan Peterson, The School Of Life, and Stoicism shows that people are receptive to it.

Damn shame.

ones personal ethics can be simplified through the analogy of borromean rings



legal
sociocultural
personal/group/spiritual (identity)

im a godless atheist but i nevertheless have a personal code of conduct which doesnt exist in any (necessarily) legal or socio-cultural framework, for example. one's choices, actions, and beliefs are aligned with and borne out in accordance with something like this analogy. this has nothing to do with any increased (proof?) academic discussion of 19th century french philosophy.

to blame social upheaval on some perceived academic movement is misguided at best. we can see what it really is- take it at face-value. this group-think is misaligned with that group-think, and how they do or don't align with legal structures creates social upheaval.


now etiologically speaking, people will "blame" action on passed events to create narrative. "i, person of color, am pulling down this statue because i was oppressed", "i did not get the scholarship because i am a white male". all of that is bullshiit. ultimately peoples actions allign with their group narrative. rioters are not rioting because the read Foucault- almost never.

I understand where you are coming from in the pop sense of the term post-modernism, but when I began to look into postmodernism it's far more complicated than I was lead to believe by people like Jordan Peterson.

It honestly seems to have value, because it points out things like; what people usually consider a historical truth is based on ideology. Kind of like David Hume's pointed out that behind every moral prescription is often an unacknowledged objective and value-judgement.

I understand and agree your general point about the dangers of subjectivity and relativism though.I respect your perspective.

I personally do not pretend to be good at formal logic (I understand the basics e.g. what a Syllogism is), but I think more than logic being taught is needed. Also, logic only teaches consistency in thought and argumentation, but it doesn't teach content (e.g. application, values, objectives).

What I think is as useful as taught logic is being taught comparative analysis. Comparing and contrasting different ideas,philosophies, religions, ideologies, etc. and then forming a conclusion about which one you think is more accurate, useful, moral, etc. IME it's through comparative analysis where our minds, by necessity, strengthen or reexamine conclusions.

Robert Anton Wilson and my experience trying to analyze the 07/08 meltdown influenced me a lot to delve into comparative analysis, and then I saw it's benefit. Which is part of the reason why I don't like political echo chambers, and will seek out perspectives that I disagree with or are unfamiliar with.

Found the post-modernist.

Define what it means “multi-dimensional spectrum of theories”. To me, it sounds like you’re pulling the same liberal arts academia bull**** of trying to make something sound more important than what it really is. Multi-dimensional in the mathematical sense with a variety of inputs? Nope, that doesn’t make sense. Multi-dimensional in the spatial sense? Nope. So again looks like word vomit to obfuscate that there is no substance behind the meaning.

At the end of the day, you post-modernist adherents are the most illogical and intellectually inferior people in all of philosophy. Your philosophy makes an objective claim that everything is subjective. This in itself is illogical as the claim itself cannot be A and non-A at the same time.

Here’s the thing, I don’t really care if a professor wants to take a constructive stance, or inter subjective stance. They both rely upon subjective experience or subjective knowledge to make their claims. Morality is not subjective, it is objective.

Now to really piss you off. Morality stems from an objective truth, that is God. Hence, why you can find common moral truths such as murder is wrong, stealing is wrong, rape is wrong, across all human cultures. They weren’t independently derived by humans, they weren’t intuitively derived, morality is a part of human nature and what means to be human itself because we are a creation of God in His image.

Lol @ Christians trying to prove anything using your warped death cult