"In all philosophising so far it has not been a question of 'truth' at all, but of something else - namely of health, futurity, growth, power, life..."
- Friedrich Nietzsche, The Joyous Science, Preface to the Second Edition, §2.
"The teachers of the purpose of life. Whether I look upon men with a good or evil eye, I always find them engaged in but one task, each and every one of them: the preservation of the human race. And certainly not from any great love for it, but simply because nothing in them is older, stronger, more inexorable or invincible than that instinct - because this instinct is precisely the nature of our species and herd."
- Friedrich Nietzsche, The Joyous Science, Book I, §1.
ما هي السلفية؟ مقدمة بسيطة للموضوع
السلفية في الأصل هي حركة إصلاحية بدأت مع رجال دين إصلاحيين مثل محمد عبده، وهو كان يريد دمج الحداثة مع التقاليد. السلفية في بداية القرن التاسع عشر كان مفهومها تجديدًا للدين، أي بدلًا من الاعتماد على كلام الفقهاء
"Science never pursues the illusory aim of making its answers final, or even probable. Its advance is, rather, towards an infinite yet attainable aim: that of ever discovering new, deeper, and more general problems, and of subjecting our ever tentative answers to ever renewed and ever more rigorous tests."
—Karl Popper, The Logic of Scientific Discovery (1959)
Malthus is mostly extremely accurate going backwards from 1798. A cyclical view of history based on recurring agricultural-demographic crises is more or less what we observe. Going forwards from 1798 you just need more sophisticated neo-malthusianism.
Anyone speaking of "concrete life," "sociohistorical reality," "particular lifeform," "social process," "life process," and the like is largely indebted to Marx whether one likes it or not.
1/2
"By deifying history to discredit God, Marxism has only succeeded in making God seem stranger and more obsessive. Everything in humanity can be stifled except the need for the absolute, which would survive the destruction of temples and even the disappearance of religion."
The “blank slate” theory has been collapsing for decades.
Chomsky’s “poverty of stimulus” argument already showed that humans do not receive enough linguistic input to explain language acquisition through experience alone.
Children hear incomplete sentences, slang, grammatical mistakes, and fragmented speech. Yet within only a few years, they can produce entirely new sentences while instinctively respecting complex grammatical rules nobody explicitly taught them.
The implication is obvious: the brain must already contain innate cognitive structures that experience activates and refines rather than creates from nothing.
Evolutionary psychology later reinforced the same conclusion through the idea of a universal human nature rooted in biology.
Now neuroscience is increasingly pointing in the same direction. Researchers like George Dragoi suggest the brain may contain pre-configured neural structures, a kind of generative grammar underlying learning itself.
The old tabula rasa model survived less because of science and more because it was politically useful. If humans are infinitely malleable, then institutions and social engineers can endlessly attempt to redesign them.
«There is no reason why pragmatists steeped in Darwinism should not be reactionary or conservative, and so it is no surprise that some have been.»
—Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy, Richard A. Posner.
“To speak more clearly, one cannot be enthusiastic about dialectic and involve oneself in the revival of Hegelian philosophy while at the same time pushing aside – with a wink of the eye and a pitiful smile – things like his Christianity, his Christology, and his doctrine of +
At 34:15-35:40 is a nice exchange in which Dwarkesh asks about migration vs. selection and David explains it clearly with the example of Intelligence and how migration and selection have affected it.
People have misinterpreted selection for Intelligence as evidence that...
1/3
The historicism of Spengler & Evola is empirically persuasive but the political action their tragic fatalism inspires is a kind of heroic last stand, while Marxist Historical Materialism is full of holes, yet it generates the absolute conviction of revolutionary inevitability.
Ludwig van Beethoven - Triple Concerto, Op. 56 (1804)
II. Largo
Isabelle Faust (Violin), Sol Gabetta (Cello), Kristian Bezuidenhout (Piano)
Giovanni Antonini | Kammerorchester Basel
"This battle is life, and life in the true Nietzschean sense of a cruel, ruthless, and relentless battle that stems from the will to power."
— Spengler, Man and Technics
“The stupidity of people on the left who believe that you can fight capitalism in the name of ‘progress’ is matched by the stupidity of people on the Right who want to defend both ‘traditional values’ and the market that undermines them.”
Alain de Benoist
“Polytheism corresponds better to the diversity of our tendencies & our impulses. Monotheism curbs our sensibility. We were more normal with several gods than we are with only one. If health is a criterion, what a setback monotheism turns out to be!”
E. M. Cioran, The New Gods
Carl Schmitt expressed the idea that only those theories are truly political which regard man as essential dangerous, which liberalism does not. There's an "anthropological professional of faith" at the bottom of our ideas. Applies to techno optimism/doomerism also, perhaps.
“From the point of view of appearance and brilliance, the eagle is obviously the more virile conception of the two. Not only does it rise in radiant zones of the solar sky, but it resides there with uncontested glamour. The eagle’s hooked beak, which cuts all that enters into competition with it and cannot be cut, suggests its sovereign virility. Thus the eagle has formed an alliance with the sun, which castrates all that enters into conflict with it (Icarus, Prometheus, the Mithraic bull).”
Georges Bataille, Erotism