Message from Mark Vandal in Literature Club #general
For philosophy I would highly recommend "Meditations" by Marcus Aurelius. It's pretty much all of the emperor's writings compiled into one book. It's an essential text for Stoicism.
The World as Will and Representation by Arthur Schopenhauer
If you get one as "the world as will and idea" that is trash
Edited to ruin your mind
Don't just sit down and read this one. One of THE great Roman emperors and one if the greatest stoic philosophers. Read this I'm stints. Every few days pick it up and read a few passages
I found this hard to get through tbh. But it's worth a read and one of the great classics of western literature
Tf when you used to be a classics major and had to read all this stuff.
Hello. Just wanted to say that I studied Philosophy for my undergrad and would be happy to help with recommendations.
If anyone is looking for an introductory text to Heidegger, this essay series is a good place to start.
This guy is by no means a professional author, but he is an excellent example of a normal young man who saw that society was lacking and slowly turned towards embracing his heritage and identity. Book is good because it isn't super convoluted like some works and really speaks to young people.
Excellent passage. Is that Schmitt?
Ortega y Gasset
Just finished this book and....OMG this guy was a pan-Europeanist who rejected communism and petty nationalism!
It's called, Revolt of the Masses, and I definitely recomend it. I am surprised I had never heard of it before finding it at Barnes and Noble. People in our movment should be reading this.
Jose Ortega y Gasset
He's a Spanish Philosopher
This book will have IE cards in it for the next Barnes and noble run.
@Deleted User, just got a copy! I'm pretty stoked to start it considering your high praises.
This is literally a necessity!
@SamanthaM added to my list... So many books!!! So little time!!!!
I've been reading Spinoza's "Ethics" for my early modern philosophy class and I'm really suprised how compatible his ideas seem to be with an identitarian and traditionalist worldview, especially considering Spinoza's (((background))). Spinoza doesn't believe in free will, he believes that all actions of a body are caused either by that body's essence (nature) or by an outside force acting on the body (nurture). Despite Spinoza not believing in free will he does believe in a different type of freedom, which he defines as having one's actions be caused by one's own essence. So in so far as a body's actions are caused by its own essence it is free, and in so far as its actions are caused by another body acting on it it is not free. One of his central ideas is that the essence of a thing is to exist, and that because of this all bodies will strive to preserve themselves in so far as their actions are caused by their own essence. So if a body is not striving to preserve its own existence it is due to another force acting on it and negating the influence of that body's own essence (think how (((cultural-marxism))) and liberalism in general have turned us against our own nature). But Spinoza doesn’t think each body strives solely for its own existence, he sees each body as being made up of other, smaller bodies which are also made up of smaller bodies which are also made up of smaller bodies and on and on ad infinitum. These smaller bodies strive to preserve their own existence, but in order to do that they have to subordinate their own will to survive to that of the larger body that they make up.