Know Thyself
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Know Thyself

Nothing in Excess
 
HomePortalSearchRegisterLog in

Share
 

 Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2
AuthorMessage
Kultur

Kultur

Gender : Male Posts : 199
Join date : 2021-02-14
Location : Faustian Land

Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 EmptySat Apr 17, 2021 1:05 am

Satyr wrote:
When males are feminized the vacuum forces females to behave more masculine...though they cannot do more than pretend by imitating social caricatures.
Another by product of feminization is hypermasculinity, like that displayed in cRap.

Those who have no experience with real masculinity associate it with caricatures they were sold by pop-art, i.e., Hollywood; they hyperinflate some traits, like aggressiveness, because they have no clue what a man is or how real men behave.
Hyperbole is a sign of insecurity and ignorance.
Satyr wrote:
Both males and females are being feminized.
Masculinization - including hypermasculinity - is a side-effect of this feminization - imitating what is being eliminated.

In females and males this feminization is a regression to adolescence, when boys and girls complete their gender divergence.

It can be said that the masculinization of the females is also part (a "side-effect", as you said) of the feminization. But if one says that, one should also say, whether and how one calls the process altogether, thus: as an umbrella term. Again the words "nihilism", "decadence" come to my mind.
Back to top Go down
http://www.hubert-brune.de/
Kultur

Kultur

Gender : Male Posts : 199
Join date : 2021-02-14
Location : Faustian Land

Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 EmptySat Apr 17, 2021 1:57 am

But because without the help of Western technology, pharmacy,  surgery all this exaggerated  build-up of muscles and sexual characteristics would not be seen at all or hardly at all, we now always have to look at these "rebuilt" people. If it were not so exaggerated, as it is meanwhile, one could find pleasure in it, but ..., I must honestly say: I don't like to see it.  And as if that were not already bad enough: The greed for power functioning over the money will drive this decadent development further.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
The tattoos will be delivered later!
Back to top Go down
http://www.hubert-brune.de/
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 31487
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 56
Location : Hyperborea

Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 EmptyTue Dec 07, 2021 11:12 pm

Heidegger's critique of Spengler.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
Kultur

Kultur

Gender : Male Posts : 199
Join date : 2021-02-14
Location : Faustian Land

Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 EmptyWed Dec 08, 2021 9:22 pm

Interesting. Thank you for the film.

Especially the young Heidegger fought very strongly against psychologism and historicism. Already his dissertation was directed against psychologism. And also in his main work psychologism together with historicism is the object of Heidegger's criticism. This attitude towards psychologism and historicism is typical for the time. Already Nietzsche had turned against historicism in his book "Vom Nutzen und Nachteil der Historie für das Leben" in 1874. Spengler, however, did not do so, although the hostility against historicism was even stronger at the very time when Spengler wrote the first volume of his major work (1911-1918) than it had been in 1874. Heidegger, however, kept his reservations about psychologism and historicism until the end of his life. If one comes across the noun "Historie" or the adjective "historisch" in his books, one can be prepared for a negative judgment; but if one reads the noun "Geschichte" or the adjective "geschichtlich," the judgment is positive. Heidegger was himself very much historically (thus: geschichtlich) oriented. So his critique was directed at historicism; and historicism "produces" history (Historie), but not history (Geschichte).
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
There is again a translation problem here. The German nouns "Geschichte" and "Historie" always have only one equivalent in English: "History". The same applies to the German adjectives "geschichtlich" and "historisch": "historical". There is no equivalent in English for the noun "Geschichte" nor for the adjective "geschichtlich".

Heidegger, at any rate, wanted to make clear by the use of the different words that he was, on the one hand, a very historically (geschichtlich) thinking person, but on the other hand, not a historistically (historisch), namely not a historistically (historistisch) thinking person. From his point of view, the latter was the case with Spengler.

(I did not understand everything the man said in the film, since he speaks heavily with an accent and does not pronounce the German names in German. In the flow of speech something gets lost. Well, I should have listened to it another time.)

But it seems that in Heidegger's critique of Spengler, historicism plays a big role. Right? And that Spengler did not think like Heidegger is clear anyway. Besides, Spengler didn't take philosophy very seriously. Heidegger could have learned from him, too. Because Heidegger had to separate himself with increasing age more and more from philosophy, because he noticed that his "thinking" ("Denken") can not be covered by philosophy. Therefore, from a certain point on, he spoke only of the "Denken" ("thinking"), no longer of "Philosophie" ("Philosophy").

Spengler was primarily oriented to Goethe; and Goethe may have been a philosopher too; but he would not have attached much importance to being called a "philosopher"; and so was Spengler.
Back to top Go down
http://www.hubert-brune.de/
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 31487
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 56
Location : Hyperborea

Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 EmptyWed Dec 08, 2021 10:33 pm

How is Geschichte defined?

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
Kultur

Kultur

Gender : Male Posts : 199
Join date : 2021-02-14
Location : Faustian Land

Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 EmptyMon Dec 20, 2021 11:17 pm

Everything is "Geschichte".

(••) "Geschichte" comes from "Geschehnis" ("happening"), from what "geschehen ist" ("has happened") and "geschieht" ("happens") - including what „geschah“ („happened“) and „geschieht “(„happens“) to you and others. Another word for "Geschehnis" ("happening") is "Ereignis" ("event"). So "Geschichte" also means "event", especially "sequence(s) of event(s)". (••) Moreover, "Geschichte" means "Wissen" ("knowledge"), "Tun" ("doing") and "Erzählung" ("telling") of what "happened" and "happens".

When did the "Historie" begin? According to Heidegger, with the Church Fathers (they began in the 1st century), and that means for him: with the end of the Ancient Greekity. Others say that the "Historie" began with the early, the high or the late Middle Ages. With a clear conscience one can say that the "Historie" began in the 15th century. In any case, either still in the Middle Ages, but at the latest in the 15th century, the following meeting took place: (••) "Geschichte" as "Geschehnis" ("happening"), "Begegnung" ("encountering") and "Tun" ("doing") came together with (••) "Geschichte" as "Wissen" ("knowledge"), "Erzählung" ("telling") of "Geschehnis" ("happening"), "Begegnung" ("encountering") and "Tun" ("doing"). So "Geschichtswissenschaft" ("science of history" ()) and "Historie" () emerged from "Geschichte". But "Geschichte" remained "Geschichte", did not change its meaning. It was only added. – So much for the history of how "Historie" emerged from "Geschichte".

According to the "Historie", "Geschichte" is the object of the "Historie", but the "Historie" is only a part of "Geschichte". "Geschichte" is not a part of anything, because everything is "geschichtlich", thus: part of "Geschichte"."Geschichte" means the story without any analyzing and qualifying, classifying and objectifying or any other determination. It is something between "story" and "history" (in the case of being no "Historie"), but never like "Historie". "Geschichte" is as such free from historiography, so besides the oral tradition an independent phenomenon, not determined by anything, thus also not by science and technology. When it becomes "written history", it is already almost "Historie", but the systematization, the analysis, the qualification, the objectification, etc. - in short: the scientification and technization - are still missing then, and when they are not missing anymore, then this "written history" has already become historiography, thus "Historie". Because when something is put in writing, it is only a matter of time until it is systematically misused for power purposes. – For example: Despite his use of writing, Thucydides was not a historian of "Historie", but a historian of "Geschichte". This is what Heidegger also said.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"Historismus" ("historicism"), as part of "Historie", which is part of "Geschichte", is merely a "mental superstructure" or a "subset" of "Historie"; and "Historie", as part of "Geschichte", is merely a "mental superstructure" or a "subset" of "Geschichte". "Geschichte" is the base. Only it is something of its own. "Historismus" is nothing without "Historie" and nothing without "Geschichte", "Historie" is nothing without "Geschichte".

"Historie" is always already analyzed and qualified, classified, determined, established on the basis of "facts" ("historical facts") in a scientific and technical manner (ready for the mass media). This means for the critics of historicism: determined by historicism. For the critics of historicism, the historicists were the ones who thought that they could determine everything by means of "Historie" and therefore relativize everything (as the psychologists do by means of "Psyche").

Like Heidegger - or even more than him - I criticize psychologism. And just like him - or a little less than him - I criticize historicism.

The following comparison: If the history (Geschichte) were the time and the history (Historie) were the physics, then the history (Historie) could not explain with historical means what the history (Geschichte) is, although it uses the history (Geschichte) constantly as means or category. Also physics is not able to say or to show with physical means or methods what the time is.

Historicism (Historismus), as part of history (Historie), which is part of history (Geschichte), is merely a "mental superstructure" of history (Historie); and history (Historie), as part of history (Geschichte), is merely a "mental superstructure" of history (Geschichte). History (Geschichte) is the base. Only it is something of its own. Historicism (Historismus) is nothing without history (Historie) and nothing without history (Geschichte), history (Historie) is nothing without history (Geschichte).

History (Geschichte) exists even without historiography; history (Historie) is almost synonymous with historiography.

History (Geschichte) can always be without history (Historie). History (Historie) can never be without history (Geschichte). History (Historie) is part of history (Geschichte), but history (Geschichte) is not part of history (Historie).

Therefore, Heidegger can say: "Alles Historische ist auf das Geschichtliche angewiesen. Dagegen bedarf die Geschichte nicht der Historie. Der Historiker ist stets nur ein Techniker der Publizistik. Vom Historiker unterschieden bleibt der Geschichtsdenker." Usual English translation (here of a machine translator): "Everything historical is dependent on the historical. History, on the other hand, does not need history. The historian is always only a technician of journalism. The historical thinker remains distinguished from the historian." My tranbslation: "Everything of Historisches is dependent on Geschichtliches. Geschichte, on the other hand, does not need Historisches. The Historiker is always only a technician of journalism. The thinker of Geschichte remains distinguished from the Historiker."

According to Heidegger, "Geschichte" is the change of the essence of truth. It fundamentally transcends the realm of the historical. Therefore, "Geschichte" is the "specific happening of the existing human being (Dasein), in such a way that the happening that is 'past' in the togetherness and at the same time 'handed down' and continuing to have an effect is considered as history in the accentuated sense" (translated by me). In Heidegger's case, therefore, "Geschichte" is more distinguished from "Historie" than in the case of word scientists, lexicologists, philologists and other linguists, even more than in the case of historians, historicists). Particularly memorable is Heidegger's statement in "Sein und Zeit" ("Being and Time") that history is to be understood as "die Wiederkehr des Möglichen" ("the return of the possible"). Therefore, it also indicates how Dasein must be open and ready for such a return. Thereby, "Geschichte" or "Geschichtlichkeit" (often translated as "historicity", but "Historizität is exactly what it is noti) is closely connected with the interweaving of the time ecstasies: (1.) "Auf-sich-zu" ("towards-itself"): "Zukunft" ("future"); (2.) "Zurück-auf" ("back-to"): "Gewesenheit" (mostly, but not exactly like "present perfect" and in any case no real past, because past is over, but the human as Dasein is not over); (3.) "Begegnenlassen" ("letting-meet"): "Gegenwart" ("present"). It presupposes a truth event and the clearing of Sein (being).

So Heidegger’s understanding of "Geschichte" is a fundamental ontological one. Against this background, the concept of "Geschichte" as "Seinsgeschichte" ("Geschichte of being") merely requires a deepening of this fundamental ontological understanding of "Geschichte".

Not only "Geschichte" and "Historie", but also and even more "Geschichtlichkeit" and "Historizität" are clearly distinguished.

If a translator knew little of the German language and little of Heidegger's philosophy and translated into English, for example, he would always translate both "Geschichte" and "Historie" as "history" and both "Geschichtlichkeit" and "Historizität" as "historicity". And as I already said: each time each of these German words would be translated wrongly here.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Martin Heidegger (translated by me): "The apologetic business of cultural Christianity, practiced for a long time (since Irenaeus) in the Occident, is the preform of modern (neuzeitliche) history (Historie). This may never get together with Thucydides, but with Augustine and the civitas dei, from which then finally the very most Christian modern (neuzeitliche) empire of the highest cultural values has become, which once again confirms what it only wants to 'revalue'. Therefore - because history (Historie) comes from it - the cultural Christianity can also make use of history (Historie) with a special virtuosity; this Christian way of 'rewriting' history (Geschichte) necessarily makes school within the modern (neuzeitlich) age, the more modern (neuzeitlicher) it becomes."

Martin Heidegger (translated by me): "In the hidden rest of this change rests and swings, hangs and sways, freezes and staggers that which one establishes from the 'history' ('Historie'), i.e. from the spying out and investigation of the objectified 'history' ('Geschichte'), as the events and achievements, i.e. the things and deeds, in short as the facts. These determinations then appear with the gigantic effort of the technical apparatus of modern research and give the appearance that the technique of history is history (Geschichte) itself. One therefore equates 'the historical' with the historical ('Geschichtlichen'). From this 'historical' one then draws the 'balances', one gives the 'valuations' and calculates the 'quotas' of the 'costs' which 'man' has to spend in history (Geschichte). It is probably no coincidence that also a historical (geschichtlicher) thinker of the rank of Jacob Burckhardt, and especially he, moves in the field of view of 'balances', 'taxations', 'quotas' and 'costs' and calculates history (Geschichte) according to the scheme 'culture and barbarism'. Nietzsche, too, makes the 'estimating in values', i.e. the calculating, the final form of the occidental metaphysical thinking."

Martin Heidegger (translated by me): "The history (Geschichte) becomes never accessible to the historical (historischen) research, because this would like to confirm every time already the opinion about the history (Geschichte), namely an unthought, a so-called self-evident, with unthought and by the research and so only consolidates the unthought self-evident."

Martin Heidegger (translated by me): "Because history (Historie) as a 'science' arises from a certain form of Occidental history (Geschichte) - its modern (neuzeitlichen) essence - history (Historie) is not only an indifferent superstructure of a knowledge of history (Geschichte) above history (Geschichte), but one of the essential ways in which history is 'made'. This historical role of history has not yet been recognized, let alone its significance for the decisive period of modern times (Neuzeit) has not yet been assessed."

Sources:
Martin Heidegger, "Sein und Zeit", 1927, S. 379.
Martin Heidegger, "Überlegungen", VII-XI, 1938/’39, in: Gesamtausgabe, Band 95, S. 47.
Martin Heidegger, "Parmenides", 1942/’43, in: Gesamtausgabe, Band 54, S. 1, 4-5, 80, 81-82, 94-95, 142.


Note:
I myself divide all development roughly into "cosmogenesis", "evolution" and "Geschichte". The physical-chemical ("cosmogenetic") includes the biological ("evolutionary") as well as the cultural ("geschichtlich") development, but nevertheless all development stages are "geschichtlich", because the human spirit, which has conceived and just spiritually developed all these development stages, is a part of the "Geschichte", and this means that "cosmogenesis" and "evolution" are parts of the "Geschichte" too. "Being" (Heidegger: "Sein") becomes recognizable only through man (Heidegger: "Dasein", "Da-Sein") resp. his "Geschichte". Without man there would be nothing that could know or experience the menanig of being – Everything is "Geschichte".Man’s thoughts, that is needed for the recognition, is part of the Geschichte. – Everything is "Geschichte".


Last edited by Kultur on Wed Dec 22, 2021 9:23 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
http://www.hubert-brune.de/
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 31487
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 56
Location : Hyperborea

Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 EmptyTue Dec 21, 2021 9:32 am

So, Geschichte are the "events" of existence, the interactions, in my lingo....and historie is the recitation of facts concerning events, whereas historismus is the official narrative.

One can select historical facts concerning events - historie - to fabricate a particular narrative historismus.

Orwell, George wrote:
Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
Æon
Wyrm
Æon

Gender : Male Posts : 3254
Join date : 2014-03-25
Location : Outside

Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 EmptyTue Dec 21, 2021 10:32 am

The bigger the Lie, the bigger the cost & upkeep of maintaining it.

This is a current, postmodern trend in Cinema and tv Programming.

Hollywood is no longer concerned about profits or losses, and happily eats 'costs' of loss of profit at the Blockbuster since about 2010. They no longer pretend about their intentions and motivations at this point, a signal of the dieing times and decay.


This also occurs in Nature, the greater the deception, the greater energy and effort exerted to maintain it.

Self-deceit costs the most, as an organism must expend continual mental energy on "Cognitive Dissonance", leading to Compartmentalization. Obvious logical contradictions, defying Common Sense, become subconsciously suppressed after Indoctrination of children and teenagers takes hold.


To defy all of this, is quite simple, "I don't believe you". An anti-Authoritarian disposition easily refutes indoctrination.

And once one Big Lie is untangled, it becomes the string that deconstructs the entire sweater and cloth.
Back to top Go down
Kultur

Kultur

Gender : Male Posts : 199
Join date : 2021-02-14
Location : Faustian Land

Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 EmptyTue Dec 21, 2021 9:08 pm

Satyr wrote:
So, Geschichte are the "events" of existence, the interactions, in my lingo....and historie is the recitation of facts concerning events, whereas historismus is the official narrative.

One can select historical facts concerning events - historie - to fabricate a particular narrative historismus.

Orwell, George wrote:
Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.
The main point in all this is the distinction between (1) what "happened" or "has happened" ("happening" = "Geschehnis" ==> "Geschichte") and (2) what is made out of it ("Historie"), how it is influenced, e.g. for the propaganda of the power or also "only" for the science, but which itself is meanwhile also dependent on the power.

According to Heidegger, "Geschichte" has always to do with "Sein" or "Seyn" (ontolgical difference means the difference between "Sein" and "Seiendem"), while "Historie" has much to do with technics, the machination, which relies on calculation and threatens earth and world, i.e.: it basically threatens "Sein" or "Seyn".

Historicism is a high modern (civilizational) phenomenon, i.e.: it is very susceptible to nihilism, if not part of nihilism itself.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


Last edited by Kultur on Wed Dec 22, 2021 10:58 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top Go down
http://www.hubert-brune.de/
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 31487
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 56
Location : Hyperborea

Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 EmptyTue Dec 21, 2021 9:12 pm

Like how they reinvented history to accord with their ideals after the wars.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
Kultur

Kultur

Gender : Male Posts : 199
Join date : 2021-02-14
Location : Faustian Land

Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 EmptyTue Dec 28, 2021 5:41 am

Yes.

When it is said, for example, that history is "made," this is true on two levels: (1.) on the level of "history" ("Geschichte") and (2.) on the level of "history" ("Historie"). The distinction in German between "Geschichte" and "Historie" is very meaningful.

And for Heidegger such a distinction is even more very meaningful.
Back to top Go down
http://www.hubert-brune.de/
Kultur

Kultur

Gender : Male Posts : 199
Join date : 2021-02-14
Location : Faustian Land

Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 EmptyMon Jan 31, 2022 11:01 pm

Concerning Heidegger's Spengler-critiques, it is noticeable that in his first published Spengler-critique (1923) Heidegger hardly said anything negative, but rather neutral and positive about Spengler's main work, which for the most part still applies to his next two published Spengler-critiques (1929 and 1930), and that in his later published Spengler critiques (1936-’39, 1938/’39, 1942/’43), however, he seems to have reversed, indeed more than reversed, this relationship, namely to have said hardly anything positive, but something neutral and very much negative about Spengler's main work.

How did this change come about?

Well, Heidegger began in the mid-1930s to deal with Nietzsche more intensively than before - an argument that was to last until 1946 - and said publicly that most of what Spengler said in his main work came from Nietzsche, that basically in Spengler's main work Nietzsche's metaphysics of the will to power and the eternal recurrence of the same spoke and thus the completed but not overcome nihilism.

Nietzsche, contrary to his claims, his will, his wish, did not overcome nihilism - likewise, Nietzsche did not overcome metaphysics and was never able to separate himself from Schopenhauer and Wagner.

But if one interprets Spengler only as a Nietzschean, then one takes away from his main work about 70%, at any rate more than 50%. Spengler's main work goes back primarily to Goethe. The comparative method (cp. e.g. analogy and homology) as the most important thing in Spengler's philosophy of history and culture goes back to that morphology as developed by Goethe.

Geschichte is not Historie. (Cp. my next to last and last post). According to Heidegger, Historie is the technification of Geschichte, the technique of Geschichte, a part of the "Gestell", the "Machenschaft", the machination. Historie leads necessarily to Historismus - which makes everything even much worse. Occidental metaphysics (Heidegger also counts Greece as Occidental, the tradition did not, neither did Spengler) is nihilistic for Heidegger; it began with Plato and was brought to completion by Hegel and Nietzsche. Now, because Heidegger sees in Spengler only a Nietzschean and in Nietzsche the so far last of the two completers of occidental nihilism and thus also of metaphysics and subjectivism, he must interpret Spengler's main work also in this context. Occidental subjectivists imagine, secure, produce, order and so on very subjectively and thereby protect their inventory. The just mentioned "Gestell" subordinates everything, and that at the expense of "Sein" ("being") - one could also say: at the expense of nature.

If subjectivism is in its completion, then everyone can tell or write history according to his own (subjective) will, i.e. completely subjective, also extremely subjective, i.e. solipsistic - and it depends on his power whether his text is heard or seen (read). This has happened and happens more and more often, especially strongly accelerated since the beginning of the internet. No wonder that the monopolization of the media has increased more and more in the course of the last time. Today, one can say, the interpretation of history is dictated by the monopolized media - completely subjectively and completely in the sense of the just mentioned "Gestell" (Technik, Machenschaft, machination).

What the "Gestell" is doing is inevitably leading to the destruction of our planet. The planet can and will defend itself in its own way. At the latest when it does so, people will know again what "Sein" mean, including its relation to the "Dasein" (human being - "das historische Tier").
Back to top Go down
http://www.hubert-brune.de/
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 31487
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 56
Location : Hyperborea

Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 EmptyMon Jan 31, 2022 11:12 pm

Subjectivism is nihilism's objective. When you adopt a goal, an ideal, as your own then you cannot overcome it but become entrapped by it.
Nietzsche diagnosed nihilism, he did not trace it back to its source - its cause. He simply observed and reported the symptoms.
His polemic against Christianity did not follow the infection back to its source.

What I took from Spengler was his organic analysis of culture, connecting genes with memes in a logical continuum.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
Kultur

Kultur

Gender : Male Posts : 199
Join date : 2021-02-14
Location : Faustian Land

Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 EmptyTue Feb 01, 2022 11:01 pm

Satyr wrote:
What I took from Spengler was his organic analysis of culture, connecting genes with memes in a logical continuum.
Spengler’s organic analysis of culture goes back to Goethe’s developed morphology. Heidegger did not consider this in his Spengler critique, at least he did not mention it. Heidegger assumed very much the effects of Nietzsche on many contemporary thinkers (philosophers), poets and other artists, and these effects of Nietzsche were indeed enormous. (Just think not only of philosophy, but also of art, e.g. of Expressionism, Dadaism, Constructivism, Futurism, Surrealism and the like.) But with Spengler the influence of Nietzsche was more limited than with many other thinkers, poets and other artists of that time.
Back to top Go down
http://www.hubert-brune.de/
Sponsored content




Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity - Page 2 Empty

Back to top Go down
 
Spengler: Riding the Tiger of Modernity
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 2 of 2Go to page : Previous  1, 2
 Similar topics
-
» Horseback Riding
» Oswald Spengler docu that used to be on Youtube?
» Modernity
» Modernity
» Modernity

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Know Thyself :: AGORA :: LYCEUM-
Jump to: