The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Maybe Western philosophy made no progress in the 20th century because of war
| https://imgur.com/a/o2g8xYK | 08/10/26 |
| VoteRepublican | 08/10/26 |
| The Penis | 08/10/26 |
| Kenneth Play | 08/10/26 |
| Metaphysics | 08/10/26 |
| The Penis | 08/10/26 |
| Metaphysics | 08/10/26 |
| The Penis | 08/10/26 |
| Metaphysics | 08/10/26 |
| https://i.imgur.com/wa2B8mT.png | 08/10/26 |
| The Penis | 08/10/26 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: August 10th, 2026 8:21 PM Author: https://imgur.com/a/o2g8xYK if you just spent 5,000 years not anticipating WWI, what have you got to say now? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5891664&forum_id=2most#50059257) |
 |
Date: August 10th, 2026 9:40 PM Author: VoteRepublican (A true Chad!! where's your gf/wifew?) is western philosphy angry theologians? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5891664&forum_id=2most#50059611) |
Date: August 10th, 2026 9:55 PM Author: The Penis Yeah 20th century west definitely made no progress. Just Frege, Russell, Wittgenstein, Godel, Tarski, Quine, Kripke, Davidson, Popper, Kuhn (and countless others), and the full development of modern mathematical logic and model theory, the rise of formal semantics, extensive work in philosophy of physics including on topics that literally didn't exist before the 20th century and about a million other things. nbd. Just pretty much everything that currently matters philosophically. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5891664&forum_id=2most#50059643) |
|
Date: August 10th, 2026 9:56 PM Author: Kenneth Play (emotional girth) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5891664&forum_id=2most#50059648) |
|
Date: August 10th, 2026 10:00 PM Author: Metaphysics These are good, but I think given OP's clear mastry of the topic you'd be much more likely to make progress in this dialogue by citing Carl Jung. Though the philosophers you mention had marginal impacts on the so called "analytic" sphere of philosophy, the "heavy lifting," as it were, was being done on the continent. This is most clear in the theology of "god-headed-ness" (particularly the presence of evil, therein), as well as the deceptively simply named "non-redemptive worldview," which finally took root after all this time. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5891664&forum_id=2most#50059657) |
|
Date: August 10th, 2026 10:07 PM Author: The Penis Yes. I am familiar with some deep work on this topic, which I came across on substack. The author essentially argues that for Jung, evil belongs within the Godhead because the Godhead symbolizes totality rather than mere moral goodness. The abraxas framework expresses this totality by encompassing God and Devil, creation and destruction, while the crucifixion of opposites symbolizes the painful conjunction of opposites through which divided reality becomes conscious of itself. By doing this, Jung requires The Shadow to be integrated rather than metaphysically projected into some external "satan". A brilliant move, if you ask me. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5891664&forum_id=2most#50059693) |
|
Date: August 10th, 2026 10:16 PM Author: Metaphysics It's important to remember that what you're reading on SubStack is a re-visioning of the Jungian model of theological wholeness. It's really at the edge of contemporary thinking on the topic, and so you may lose readers when you start to contrast the novelty of the so-called Abraxas framework with what C.G. Jung wrote in, say, CW 9(ii). There, Jung discusses the Godhead as a symbol of totality rather than mere moral goodness. By contrast, the Abraxis framework discusses the Godhead as a symbol of totality rather than mere moral goodness. This subtle but important innovation over the Jungian model is often missed by new readers, but is the key to unlocking the true Aquarian revolution of the Abraxas framework. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5891664&forum_id=2most#50059720) |
|
Date: August 10th, 2026 10:27 PM Author: The Penis Yes I agree there are some subtle points in there, where at first glance they can seem like restatements of Jung's original work, but once you really understand all the metaphors and neologisms introduced, it's like holding a key that unlocks entire new worlds within these texts. Really groundbreaking stuff. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5891664&forum_id=2most#50059762) |
|
Date: August 10th, 2026 10:32 PM Author: Metaphysics Yes, especially when you get into the nitty gritty detail of the crucifixion of opposites. You find that while Jung felt strongly that the psychological subject finds themselves in a state in which "tertium non datur" (i.e., no third thing is given; CW 8, 11, 14), in the Sub-Stack work we've been discussing the approach is truly novel. That is to say, the novel approach suggests that the psychological subject finds themselves in a state in which "tertium non datur" (i.e., no third thing is given). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5891664&forum_id=2most#50059779) |
|
Date: August 10th, 2026 10:18 PM Author: https://i.imgur.com/wa2B8mT.png (gunneratttt) Not one of those bald faggots anticipated WW1 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5891664&forum_id=2most#50059726) |
|
Date: August 10th, 2026 10:25 PM Author: The Penis Good point. In order to find a western thinker who anticipated WWI, we need to turn to Carl Jung, whose apocalyptic visions and dreams he experienced before July 1914 symbolically reproduced the violence, mass death, and collapse of European civilization that would soon occur. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5891664&forum_id=2most#50059756) |