christians of /lit/ please help me out

HOW DO I SEE MEANING

ALL I WANT IS A CALM ABSTRACT LOVE AND ACCEPTING UNDERSTANDING TOWARDS THE UNIVERSE FUCK

how did the Buddha or George Harrison do it

first: are you twelve or just dumb?

take charge of your own life pussy.

>>9492243
dumb

File: 1494439349712.png (99KB, 413x231px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 413x231px

>tfw you went through that phase for years
>tfw you kept having questions like "why do I still care about meaning? why is there something instead of nothing? why would minds and subjective conscious experience emerge and try to comprehend reality and purpose and god if this is all just accidental recombinations of jiggling unconscious matter?"
>tfw everyone told you that those questions were dumb and you should just pound them down into conformity with cold materialism
>tfw started studying german idealism
>tfw realizing most of the smartest people in human history, especially post-enlightenment, have been at least some kind of hopeful deist or pantheist, if not an outright pietist who thought mankind is rationally attaining higher and higher knowledge of itself, morality, nature, and god, and there is a purpose to all this
>tfw all of the curiosities you had, but couldn't develop because no one talks about them anymore, are all eerily well fleshed out and practically universal human spiritual tendencies, like agapē
>tfw reading the transcendentalists and goethe and realizing you were looking at things all upside down, and the cosmos is a babbling brook by a spring bursting of meaning, not a cold harsh dead wasteland
>tfw seeing the threads of meaning waiting to be pulled behind every material process, scientific inquiry, and human cultural or philosophical endeavor
>tfw no longer seeing gray on gray but seeing how much color is trying to birth itself into the world to complete the picture that is life

>>9492239
>are just
Life is just life. Everything is just everything. Something is just what it is.

You've reduced the meaning. You've reduced the purpose to a purpose - nay, just a purpose. Stop cursing yourself and see how free you can actually be, and not just.

File: 1472201606333.jpg (72KB, 1127x1015px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 1127x1015px

>>9492239
>pattern seeking survival mechanisms engraved in your brain's makeup
hahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahhahaha

>>9492268
First time I've seen Stirner used properly.

>>9492268
isnt that the whole idea of spooks though?
that they are just patterns of survival that aren't capital-T true?
i suspect that a lot of stirner fans dont really understand this and just use him to dismiss ideas they dont like.
i think you might be dumb about this.

>>9492239
>>9492242
You're choosing not to believe in God because you're a degenerate. Enjoy hell faggot

>>9492279
He is one meta-step ahead of you. Whereas you've jailed yourself in the idea of 'patterns' to spook yourself, he is laughing at you trying to spook you.

>>9492268
>cognitive neuroscience is all complete bullshit
I bet you can see a zebra from a mile away.

>>9492285
>not getting the point this hard

Maybe try reddit?

>>9492282
i think that's dumb.
That's like saying math is a spook.
It can't be applied to everything but there are observable foundations in patterns.

>>9492290
>That's like saying math is a spook.
Only if you spook yourself with it. It's just another tool, or 'thing' or pattern or whatever it is. Is it what you call it, though?

With math, people tend to ignore its history, thinking that it is absolute. This is not so. Square root of two got you killed in Greece.

>>9492288
Those words refer to theories about how our minds and brains work. Dismissing them as spooks dismisses the ideas. Dismissing those PARTICULAR ideas dismisses the axioms of cognitive neuroscience and natural selection totally. It is childish, simplistic, reactionary, and anti-intellectual black and white thinking.

Tl;dr no u

>>9492290
Except you're speaking of that inclination as something distinct from your ego, some nature controlling you rather than it simply being how you personally see the world and desire.

>>9492293
youre overly philosophizing bud.
Ancient (keyword) history isn't a great support for your point imo.

>>9492296
>misses the point
>doubles down when pointed out

>>9492296
>Those words refer to theories about how our minds and brains work. Dismissing them as spooks dismisses the ideas.
How I stopped worrying and learned to love the spook.

>>9492298
it doesn't control me but math is a fundamental aspect of nature itself.
It's like saying breathing is a spook.

>When your brain is telling you what to do

I didn't think someone could be spooked this hard

>>9492300
>Ancient (keyword) history isn't a great support for your point imo.
Not even math exists in a vacuum. You think of the contemporary as separate from ancient. Why? I can see plenty of political motivations for it, yet alone they fail to explain it all.

>>9492302
If the point is that you should never be troubled by theories because they are man-made, then I flat out disagree.

>>9492303
>How I stopped worrying and learned to love the spook.
If you're not worried and you love them, how are they spooks?

>>9492305
Breathing is a spook, I choose to breath and I can choose not to.

>>9492309
see
>>9492305
dont be a dumb philosophy nerd. It's a waste of a brain.

>>9492310
>If you're not worried and you love them, how are they spooks?

Kek wtf even is this

>>9492314
You will pass out and then start breathing.

>>9492314
if you do, it kinda defeats all the actual potential of the philosophy.
the debate is a waste of breath.

>>9492319
Because I chose to do so as that new circumstance arrose

>>9492317
You are spooked by the concept of spooks, bad sir.

File: images (21).jpg (16KB, 403x365px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 403x365px

>>9492322

>>9492310
>If you're not worried and you love them, how are they spooks?
Have you had a spiritual encounter?

>>9492315
>>9492305
>dont be a dumb philosophy nerd. It's a waste of a brain.
I hope you know what you imply, but let me get this straight.
>There is a correct way to use the brain - hence 'waste' is a detriment.
>I should do it instead of my brain, or you are merely attempting to usurp my brain which would render you a spook

>math is a fundamental aspect of nature itself.
False. Math is a fundamental aspect of its axiomatic presuppositions.

>>9492328
>have you ever had a spiritual encounter?
Define spiritual.
Define encounter.

File: benny.jpg (320KB, 2560x1080px) Image search: [Google]

320KB, 2560x1080px

>>9492239

>>9492330
>Define spiritual.
Things ranging from you to God, but not beneath you.
>Define encounter
Experience and awareness. In this case, 'mutual' is a necessary requirement.

>>9492328
disgusting loser philosophy.
the field should only be used for "how to live".
You can deny my idea-seed but that doesn't make it less true.
You aren't using the spook idea to your own benefit, only self-doubt and delusion.

Breathing and the senses themselves are spooks if math is.
It's a useless debate.

>>9492345
>disgusting loser philosophy.
Ooh, I'm so spooked.
>the field should only be used for "how to live".
I take it you've lived a sheltered life.

>You can deny my idea-seed but that doesn't make it less true.
What makes it true are your children.

>>9492347
Not sure how encouraging practicality is a sheltered perspective.
but yes our children ultimately define who we were/are. children you'll never have.
your existence is a spook imo. Youre less of a being than an object that's in my future childrens' way.

>>9492343
I have had experiences that I interpreted that way at the time. I don't always interpret them that way.

>>9492354
>Not sure how encouraging practicality is a sheltered perspective.
You'll never face an internal struggle. You'll never ask 'why truth and not the alternatives?' You'll never ponder on whether to be or not to be. You'll never reach spiritual awareness, instead you will continue to preach the gospel of blindness.
>children you'll never have.
What if people stop complying when you hit them? What if you grow saboteurs with this trait of yours, and they will kill your children, 'just because'. After all, survival was the point, so I can't see a better way to get back at you. It doesn't even have to happen now, it should be enough for your genes to carry that kill switch around.
>your existence is a spook imo.
>Youre less of a being than an object that's in my future childrens' way.
I see the error in teaching plebeians how to read.

>>9492369
i am not at all shocked that my kids might be horrible monsters because that's what people are. You're no better, if anything youre worse because you take up space you won't use.
I hope my kids find fellow monsters who treat them well and appreciate them for being exactly what they are, if they die by that blade, it's just a side effect of the prescription given for the sickness that is meaninglessness and doubt, where you seem to be trapped.

I've done plenty of the spiritual/existential pondering. Done just about every hallucinogen under the sun. We exist for pleasure. Don't make it complicated.

File: unnamed (7).jpg (22KB, 250x386px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 250x386px

>>9492380
>I did existential pondering
>I chose hedonism
How does it feel to be the villain, anon?

>>9492380
>i am not at all shocked that my kids might be horrible monsters because that's what people are.
Pass on traits that are bound for extinction? Good luck with that.
>You're no better, if anything youre worse because you take up space you won't use.
That so? From whom? The argument works from God's perspective, not yours.

>>9492386
Life/God itself is the villain. Hedonism is just nature.
I'm living unspooked in the most efficient way.

>>9492391
>I'm living unspooked in the most efficient way.
For what? Pleasure? You got yourself carroted and spooked.

>>9492391
Efficient? Towards what?

>>9492389
extinction is inevitable bud.
If we're going to use the god argument i'm 99% certain God loves me more than you based on how lucky i've been with my genes/career/friendships

>>9492391
>Hedonism
>efficient
Kek maybe in your early 20s.

BTW isn't efficiency a spook in this context?

>>9492398
>thinks God needs to care about individual people to exist
Yep, truly spooked.

>>9492394
>>9492397
towards/for getting my rocks off and cementing my existence as a tangible thing to other people outside myself (the only way i can even care to exist is through them)

File: images (2).jpg (21KB, 340x433px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 340x433px

>>9492404
>I am not spooked!
>I exist through other people

>>9492398
>>9492404
>If we're going to use the god argument i'm 99% certain God loves me more than you based on how lucky i've been with my genes/career/friendships
>towards/for getting my rocks off and cementing my existence as a tangible thing to other people outside myself
Read Tolstoy, read the Bible. Especially the parts about afterlife. You're missing the point.

>>9492400
so this is a real God thing to you? I find that whole angle to be cowardly desu.
>>9492399
Hedonism is a general term. It's more just the idea of practical, considerate self-pleasure.

>>9492410
Even God as a metaphor doesn't necessitate caring about your shiny car, anon.

>>9492408
nah. afterlife is the real spook.
>>9492406
some spooks are good. if math and breathing are spooks then i'll stick with this one too.

dumb philosophy nerds don't even know how to live. just to doubt themselves into caves that give the illusion of wisdom but which are really founded on fear.

>>9492415
Philosophy takes you OUT of the cave, anon. The only one here with a hardcore philosophical position here is you. You have chosen to dig your heels in with hedonism, rather them face the chaos of change. You are spooked by the idea of escaping spooks.

>>9492415
>nah. afterlife is the real spook.
Says the person acting out despair.

You'll be forgotten. Your DNA will go extinct. Life works in such ways that you may not even remember your own pleasure, for what it was worth.

>>9492414
Let's just say God helped me stop a speeding vehicle on a dime that was laid out along a series of dimes on the freeway between chicago and san francisco.
If that's not God, which i dont know if it was, then i dont relaly give a shit about it.

>>9492415
>I'm living unspooked in the most efficient way.
>some spooks are good. if math and breathing are spooks then I'll stick with this one too.
Despicable.

>>9492426
Neither do I, but you're creating a spook to then dismiss and feel superior, rather than find mutual understanding.

>>9492426
a million dollar dime*

>>9492424
youre taking my hedonism thing too far. It's more that i want to be loved by people who i deem worthy of respect, aka not useless people. I can live to ripple and affect things and that's kinda divine to me.

>>9492429
mutual understanding is a spook imo.

>>9492433
>i want to be loved by people who i deem worthy of respect
How do you determine this? Understanding them?

> if anything youre worse because you take up space you won't use.
>extinction is inevitable
>nah. afterlife is the real spook.
>some spooks are good. if math and breathing are spooks then i'll stick with this one too.
Rejection of Logos is a terrible drug.

File: Accelerating hair loss.png (921KB, 1111x939px) Image search: [Google]

921KB, 1111x939px

>tfw Stirner is a dead meme

>>9492439
no i kinda don't think that's possible. it's like a utilitarian thing. Certain people have traits, and social standings that i admire so i want to influence them the way they influence me, but even more so. It's not a bad spook if people do it by nature.
I'm aware that I'm just a series of qualities.

>>9492441
Agreed.
Rejecting Logos means to be ruled by one's vices.

File: 1476882723379.jpg (47KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 250x250px

>>9492447
>Love is a utilitarian thing

>>9492441
i don't follow and i dont think you know how to support that statement.

>>9492447
>It's not a bad spook if people do it by nature.
Then what about accepting God and Religion? It has a story of 10'000 years at the very least.

>>9492451
love is definitely a spook.
>>9492450
youre being ruled by a vice right now. We all are.

they hypocrisy of spook-fags is astounding to me. It's like they just want to have an unpenetrable position but when you really get down to it they're just scared.

File: 725533e21821a9b7c20410775f528676354dacab6baa90484089279d4b776e72.jpg (25KB, 600x512px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 600x512px

>>9492447
>It's not a bad spook if people do it by nature.

>>9492456
that's not that long bud. I consider that just an aspect of society.

>>9492447
>by nature
So...
>>9492239
>mechanisms engraved in your brain's makeup
>It was a rigged game from the start. I never had a chance.

>but now I like it because I was programmed to

>>9492458
>love is definitely a spook.

Only to the naive. Love is the prerequisite for subjectivity. There is no ego without it

>>9492459
breathing is a spook.
better stop that shit.

>>9492462
Christ and Satan are based on Horus and Seth who are based on the Babylonian myth who is 20k years old, which is maybe as old as the oral tradition.

If that's not enough, fine. But then you can't accept any known writer in history because their words have not survived that long.
Also you should reject all technology, processed food, etc...

>>9492465
semantics.
>>9492464
I'm not OP but his problem is he is failing his most basic function as a living creature. He needs to understand the "rigged" game and play it himself by his own rules. Not get caught up in the spooks or not play at all

>>9492453
>you take space you won't be using
>extinction is inevitable
So I, an (allegedly) extinct being, am taking space from (allegedly) extinct beings. You seem to value survival despite this, yet you also believe that
>afterlife is the real spook.
Life after death is life after death. What shape it takes is not known. You reject afterlife as a spook. Then you go and accept spooks anyway.
>some spooks are good.

>>9492472
150,000 years we've been eating food and making things. It's honest-to-god nature
God as an idea is just a social solution.
nice try.

>>9492458
>youre being ruled by a vice right now. We all are.
There are degrees of vice. Don't put yourself in the same category as me unless you don't drink, smoke, take drugs, fast.

>>9492473
If you believe that some things are rigged by nature, where do you draw the line? Why do you think you can choose your choice of hedonism?

>>9492473
>semantics

Hardly. Love is the event horizon between which the self is constituted solely by object relations to subject relations. Its phenomenological importance is paramount

>>9492472
>Christ and Satan are based on Horus and Seth
Christ allegedly spent his early years in Egypt. Talmudic texts also claim that he was an Egyptian sorcerer. His magic of choice was egregore.

If Christ is indeed Logos, and every other nation would have accepted Him, it would make sense for Egyptians and the rest of the world to have some level of understanding based on Logos.

>>9492476
no the time you have is all you have and should be used accordingly. the idea of time itself is almost a spook from that perspective and extinction is almost irrelevant unless you really get caught up in that illusion.

and i can't see any evidence of the afterlife so it's definitely a spook. i can see breathing, pleasure, and math, and while htey may be spooks, they are at least useful for moment-to-moment living.

>>9492477
>God as an idea is just a social solution.
Explain hermits.

>>9492477
>150,000 years we've been eating food and making things.
Yes exactly, god as a concept is maybe one of the oldest we have because it has been worked on and off forever. But fine, reject everything you don't like as spook and indulge in your vices.

>>9492482
you read that in a book and have no idea what that really means in a practical sense. Classic spook-fag shit.
>>9492478
youre just a loser. classic spook-fag.
>>9492484
my point is proven. Youre all just lost souls who need a screen porch to hide in so you can say you know the outside.

>>9492484
Not necessarily, Christ as Logos is the most refined idea we have right now.

For instance, the flood is a universal story (even Abos have one). But the Logos in Christianity is not the same as the Logos in Islam.

File: 1483035197302.jpg (57KB, 576x436px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 576x436px

>>9492496
>you read that in a book and have no idea what that really means in a practical sense.

Give me a moment to take that sentence in

>>9492489
i just did. God isn't a truly natural phenomena, but a social one. But now the modern hermit is someone who believes in God, aka spook-fags
>>9492490
that's not forever.

>>9492496
>Spoooooooked!
>*runs*
Funny, too, that you accuse THEM of hiding.

>>9492496
Isn't being a loser a spook?
What about "lost souls" isn't that a spook?

>>9492488
>no the time you have is all you have and should be used accordingly
Who are you to tell me how to use my time? For what purpose would you even do that?
>the idea of time itself is almost a spook from that perspective and extinction is almost irrelevant unless you really get caught up in that illusion.
Even if you were correct, what is it to you? My biological / social etc. urges are not enough to command me.

>and i can't see any evidence of the afterlife so it's definitely a spook.
You die, life goes on. Afterlife in the minimal sense. Is this not what you based it all on? Yet you went on to say that extinction is inevitable.

>>9492498
what you said is absolute bulshit. flowery prose to disguise a basic idea. Fitting you'd post bloom too.

>>9492500
Look at that cognitive dissonance and laugh.

>>9492502
nah like i said, practical natural spooks are worth believing (like breathing and math).
Losers are part of basic darwinism. That may be a spook too but it's definitely having an observable effect.

>>9492500
>i just did. God isn't a truly natural phenomena, but a social one. But now the modern hermit is someone who believes in God, aka spook-fags
Most spook-fags are leftists and nihilists. They may even want to believe in God, but they will likely not do so.
>God isn't a truly natural phenomena
Only the most plebian kind of idolaters would claim that God would be such.
>but a social one
I think, therefore I am.

File: 1477521374321.jpg (47KB, 599x546px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 599x546px

>>9492505
>flowery prose
>Kantian terminology

I think you might want to start reading more

>>9492506
that's not cognitive disonance...
It's the idea that man is shaped by society and society is shaped by man. Another spooker was making a point of historical reference earlier.
This is getting childish spook-fags.

>>9492521
Isn't society a spook?

File: unnamed (1).gif (539KB, 238x155px) Image search: [Google]

539KB, 238x155px

>>9492520
Inb4 he says Kant was spooked

>>9492515
>nah like i said, practical natural spooks are worth believing (like breathing and math).
Based on what standard? It tickles your preferences in just the right way?

>>9492520
nah reading philosophy as "word" and in a non-applicable sense is literally for losers

>>9492523
maybe a necessary one again, yeah.
>>9492525
yeah, sure. so what? if that were the extent of my hedonism would that be so wrong?

>>9492527
You can buy your philosophy crystals somewhere else.

>>9492529
Look at that cognitive dissonance and laugh harder.

File: deleuze.jpg (19KB, 500x386px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 500x386px

>>9492527
>nah reading philosophy as "word" and in a non-applicable sense is literally for losers

Holy highschool

>>9492532
explain.
I've never denied that hedonism is part of the solution to the meaning problem. You have to believe in some spooks. Youre doing it right now you stupid spookfag.

>>9492527
Words are the definition of applicable, though. Your claims imply a need to go more abstract (I agree), but your intent is the opposite.

>>9492533
nah. I'm just not a fan of quoting philosophy texts because out of context it's almost meaningless because I'm a successful artist, businessman and adult.

>>9492542
and because*

>>9492542
Oh yeah please point out the text I allegedly quoted from there dipshit

>>9492535
>>9492529
Ok last question then.
Why isn't the concept of God a necessary spook?
You say that society is a necessary spook because it has observable effects, but God and Religion have an extremely long tradition and objective effects for thousands of years.

Make your case, I'll wait.

>>9492548
>Love is the event horizon between which the self is constituted solely by object relations to subject relations.
you really couldn't have phrased this in a more realistic way? It reeks of quotation.
I literally laugh at the idea that love isn't a spook. if there ever was one, this is it.

>>9492552
the concept of God is very vague so i find it hard to really say but mostly I just see it as one aspect of the society spook, but not even the greatest one.

>>9492557
>you really couldn't have phrased this in a more realistic way?

No I could not have, that is quite possibly the most specific terms I could use to describe that formulation.
I could however have used more vague language that is digestable to illiterate idiots yes but thats not the business I'm interested in here

>>9492566
Try with religion then. Why isn't religion a necessary spook? Same as above.

>>9492568
you write like a homo in that case.
You will be laughed out of professions.
Oh but you wanna be a philosopher, dont even worry then.

>>9492570
it's again just an aspect of society, helps it function. Too many rules involved so it falls into the same traps that society does at times.
That is not to say it's entirely useless though but less useful than society in general.

>>9492572
Yeah I do, fuck professions

>>9492580
good luck kid.
96% of people will hate you and your whole objective is despicable in the modern climate.

>>9492572
Why on Earth would I help build a society hell bent on banning beauty?

File: 1492844588579.jpg (1MB, 1507x2000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1507x2000px

Why do people always make this as an argument against God when it is an obvious argument for

>>9492583
>96% of people will hate you and your whole objective is despicable in the modern climate.

kek story of my life, I'm used to it

>>9492584
im arguing with children i realized.
i used to kinda respect spookfags but im really noticing how fragile these people are. It's a defense mechanism for unstable men.

>>9492592
As opposed to advertising your social status on an anonymous imageboard.

>>9492595
im vindictive and mean but I am very stable.
I only came to preach practicality.

>>9492599
>im vindictive and mean but I am very stable.
I wonder if you believe that yourself.
>I only came to preach practicality.
Reject truth in some ways, accept it in other, based on no real interest? Yeah, sounds like a stable and reasonable plan.

>>9492566
>>9492577
>Backpedaling that hard
That's what I meant by cognitive dissonance. You're shifting from spook to necessary spook to part of a spook to not a spook on a whim and then arguing that you're thinking in practical terms while the reality is that you're smashing everything you don't like to justify your hedonism.

>>9492592
You're one step off a cliff, yet proud to be on the moral high ground without noticing that you project your insecurities on a Vietnamese cartoon factory.

Spooked to hell and back.

>>9492607
the interest is society, it's pleasure as well as your own.
>>9492609
that's not accurate at all. I came here to argue that breathing and math were acceptable hedonistic spooks and then the spookfags went apeshit with the God+afterlife stuff, which really is kinda off-topic from my perspective.

>>9492616
>the interest is society, it's pleasure as well as your own.
You're treading on dangerous waters. First you state that society rejects me, aka. leaves my context of interest, and then you say that it goes against my interest which I should follow.
You're here to build saboteurs.

It's not working.

>>9492609
and God and religion are two different things.
I can believe in God to some extent as an aspect of people (society) and still see religion as a nasty side-spook

>>9492622
State and ideologies are far nastier.

>>9492621
you're not society.
You are the dregs. I kinda want to destroy you for the greater good of everyone else. It would bring me personal pleasure.
Do you follow now?

>>9492628
>you're not society.
Society stops existing the moment it rejects me. That's how it is for men who are not willing to bend the knee for other men in hope of scraps.
Assuming that we are working on self-interest.

>>9492621
>>9492628
Amazing. He is so dependent on what others think that he wants to destroy anyone refusing to play that game.

Look at that spook "greater good of everyone else". And then "It would bring me personal pleasure."

Look what I wrote earlier:
"the reality is that you're smashing everything you don't like to justify your hedonism."

How fragile your position must be to lash out that way!

>>9492239
If God doesn't exist then every system of belief or anything you use to justify your life is just a coping mechanism on the other hand engraving those concepts into your mind is probly exactly what a god would do

>>9492636
thats a mis-shaped and spook-ish way of interpreting the practical spook of society from my vantage.
Every man bows to someone for their own interests.
the problem is spookfags dont know their place (or are in firm denial).

>>9492642
Spooks are real things. Still spooks, but tangible.
What others think is all you are.
Most people would say you are a fag.
It's not just my hedonism, i'm doing it for them and even you, you just can't tell.

>>9492645
>Every man bows to someone for their own interests.
We're all equal here. :^)

>>9492649
>I'm going to invite you to this failing pyramid scheme / build a gulag for you, and it is all for your own good!

>>9492653
if everyone is in on the scheme and its rules and it manages to cross all borders/cultures it's actually kind of a legitimate and respectable spook

>>9492661
>if everyone is in on the scheme
Then the children pay. Or some poor sons of bitches in Iraq. Someone will pay for usury.

>>9492239
>The universe seems like a cold, incomprehensible vacuum
It is. Deal with it like a man.

>>9492671
sure. so what? bad things happen regardless. Even if you destroy the scheme (maybe kill yourself), the natural spooks will be reborn.

>>9492677
>sure. so what?
Society will cease. Continuum will cease. Those wars USA fought for the banks almost bankrupted the state. We know from proxy wars elsewhere that they tend to last long.

I'm all for USA being eternal hell on earth for what they did, but God doesn't really like the notion until it happens.

>>9492687
dont bring God or nations into it.
Classism, mostly defined by cashflow, is the real spook-scheme we universally subscribe to.
Like i said, I'm about practicality here.

>>9492702
>these spooks exist!
>those spooks don't exist!
Your criteria are not stable, despite what you think. It is not practicality or materialism that seems to decide what is or is not a spook, or is or is not a useful spook. The ONLY criteria at this point seems to be "winning" an argument, i.e., a tool for talking past others while still retaining your sureness that you are "right".

Is there any way to filter the word 'spook' and all of its derivatives from this board? Thanks.