Thread replies: 22
Thread images: 5
Thread images: 5
A Mournful Humanity
When I consider humanity, I grow mournful. What has humanity created? What is great? Glowing cities with a constant spew of toxic smog laying on the graves of once teeming ecosystems? We consider the ugly scars upon earth, buildings, as great pinnacles of human achievement. What do we busy ourselves with? Simple politics, trite disputes, and pornography. We pornographized our music, our journalism; our art. We are a carcinogenic society, living in places occupied by garbage we consider greatness and producing garbage, art focused on the catching of an eye.
I call for those who can to drain the cesspools of our “great” and “pure” society. Let nature reclaim what is rightfully hers. No longer should we adulterate the naked beauty of landscapes or the pure expression of an artist. I implore you to partake in a radical shift away from the stagnant landfill of society. Let us return to our roots, from whence we came. It is said “from ashes you were made, and to ashes you will return.” Stop being fooled into a fantasy that you are anything but ash.
>>
>value absent perception
pseud
>>
also the word is dust, not ashes. and read hegel to see why art is more valuable than nature
>>
File: spooks.jpg (72KB, 1127x1015px) Image search:
[Google]
72KB, 1127x1015px
>>9369572
>humanity
>greatness
>ugliness
>achievement
>negative simplicity
>morally positive natural beauty
>radicalism
>life-denial
Spookiest post on /lit/ right now imo famalam
>>
File: tom waits.jpg (55KB, 500x503px) Image search:
[Google]
55KB, 500x503px
>>9369572
ayy
>>
>>9369587
Actually while the word is dust, ashes are also mentioned in the same biblical passage. And why is questioning what humanity considers great pretentious? When dissecting anyone's works it is completely idiotic to dismiss them with simple epithets.
>>
>>9369596
I wasn't going for some "life denial" message, I was trying to express how humanities ideals are twisted bass ackwards, in my viewpoint.
>>
>>9369572
Humans are part of nature and any animal like any other, therefore our cities are no less "artificial" than termite mounds.
>>
>>9369624
>Stop being fooled into a fantasy that you are anything but ash.
Sounds pretty life denying and thoroughly Christian to me.
>humanities ideals
I assume you meant to write "humanity's ideals," in any event, you merely mean your own. I hold none of these things you've mentioned to be sacred or objectively worthwhile. "Humanity" has no ideals because it does not act, it is not a thing outside of the mind.
>bass ackwards
What a goofy, stale turn of phrase.
>>
>>9369624
Your own ideals are utterly ass backwards. You talk of the pure expression of an artist, but this is the most impure thing there is, for an artist is necessarily informed by his culture. Advertising is much purer, since it obeys the crystal-clear logic of market forces
>>
>>9369631
Can you really argue that point? Im not some SJW lookin to say "we must go vegan and western civilization sucks". My point stands that we have perverted natural beauty. Cities can stand, but are gross, filthy, smog ridden cities really what humans should consider to be impressive? We have no "west" to explore, and so Americans have completely neglected the idea of exploration and the unknown as important subjects.
>>
>>9369651
Top quality bait, I laughed in an empty room
>>
>>9369648
1) My point isn't so much religious as it is "you aren't that important", which is something society has proclaimed that everyone is, and at a young age.
2) I Apologize for the spelling mistake, but please, critique the material. And that's what I find to be a problem, people are neglecting natural beauty.
3) Again, simple insults are not useful tools in critiquing a writing, use legitimate arguments.
>>
>>9369572
That's rather pretentious so I can't take you seriously
>>
>>9369651
Would you tell me that Hollywood hasn't perverted art? It has sold out to appeal to the masses rather than express the artists', the director and writer, viewpoint?
>>
>>
File: thisisyourhome.jpg (164KB, 1240x786px) Image search:
[Google]
164KB, 1240x786px
>>9369685
Your definition of "religious" is entirely too narrow. Take the Latin root: "relegere," which literally means "to go through again." A religious viewpoint is one that advocates a concrete, static duality. It's the same thing as a fixed ideological viewpoint, effectively. And I know modern society has roundly proclaimed "you [in the general sense] aren't that important," that's why it's Christian to the core: individual suffering and life denial are the bases of every ideology, explicitly Christianity.
To your second literal point, I don't understand how saying "people are neglecting natural beauty" in any way responds to a statement that denies the reality of the concept of "the people." And to the "bass ackwards" thing, I'm just drawing your attention to the fact that it's a ridiculous thing to say, especially on 4chan, and detracts from your credibility.
>>
>>9369728
1, my claim is that society has said "You are important", I am saying that "You aren't important".
2 how is saying something in jest detracting from my credibility? I'm sorry that I have a childish sense of humor, but either way, it is not a legitimate criticism. Be honest, it was a way to speak down to me for saying my beliefs in an unofficial way.
3) I am not saying that everyone SHOULD feel the way I do, just that I think it would be better. Which, call it religious if you like, is simply an opinion. Its more of a political statement than one of religion.
>>
>>9369608
Nope. The passage he's adapting is from Genesis (also in Ecclesiastes), and "dust" is used explicitly. "Ashes" are mentioned in conjunction with "dust" later in Genesis, and also in Job, but not in the sense OP was using.
So it's wrong to say "It is said" as he did.
"Ashes to ashes" is only found in the Book of Common Prayer, not even in the Bible, and is not used in the way in which OP has laid it out (in quotation marks nonetheless!).
>why is questioning what humanity considers great pretentious?
I never said it was. Evidently you can't read.
>>
>>9369766
Genesis 18:27
And Abraham replied, "Now behold, I have ventured to speak to the Lord, although I am but dust and ashes."
1) I was quoting my pastor.
2) I was also using this passage.
3) Sorry, thought you were the guy who called me pseud. And again, why the need to be so completely disrespectful. Jesus, just look above your post.
>>
File: ideology4.jpg (88KB, 666x960px) Image search:
[Google]
88KB, 666x960px
>>9369754
OK, sure. I was wondering, since this society is framed as a screaming duality, a living brute of contradiction: half of us worship the holy "I" hedonisticly ("You are important"), half of us regress toward flat Christian ardor ("You aren't important, The People/Beauty/Life/God/The State etc. are important"). Your standpoint is one of wrote Christianity much more than the standpoint of the average capitalist shill. I abhor it.
I'd also point out that this division of persons into two opposing camps is a simplistic one, since there are thousands of ideologies that exist in as accouterments to the two vaguely conflicting camps I have outlined. But the point is that you specifically are saying nothing new here, you're just reformulating Christianity into beauty-worship.
If you don't know why saying "bass ackwards" on 4chan diminishes your intellectual standing in the eyes of the mob, you need to lurk moar.
>I am not saying that everyone SHOULD feel the way I do, just that I think it would be better.
Saying "I think they should" and "I think it would be better" amount to the same thing.
>Which, call it religious if you like, is simply an opinion
Every thing a person says is an "opinion," this is a meaningless statement.
>Its more of a political statement than one of religion.
Politics is the religion of the State.
>>
>>9369771
Gen 3:19 By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return.
Thread posts: 22
Thread images: 5
Thread images: 5