Would have had to have been

ycтaлoe иcтyплeниe, oжидaниe

flabbergasted

should i read witty before kant after hume or read witty after hegel?

If you actually want to read Kant and Hegel and think you're ready then obviously go in order

wain't

low emotional IQ

Mild bemused shock

It's something between a mild shock and helpless amusement.

it's not just an emotion, but an emotion coming from a particular sort of character. That frog variant is reminiscent of the retarded apu, but it's clearly more aware, the small skull and the hat makes it seem like a tiny old man who has no standing in life or intellectual sophistication but is keenly aware of something wrong in front of him that is being presented as normal or ok. This particular frog lacks any sort of agency other than silently noting the situation, he is crouched in the bottom of the image, he's compressed into stunted version of himself(because the frogs all exist in relation to the earlier frogs)

it doesnt matter if he is literally a tiny old man or not(insert any sort of beaten down persona), it's just a vague set of incomplete associations, the point is that it isn't simply an emotion, but an entire context involving a character and his relation to some social setting, which is the history of these sorts of memes and who has used them and for what kinds of situations. The amount of connotation in one of these images is off the charts for anyone who spends too much time on Yea Forums which is why they seem so meaning-dense and ineffable, though a fair amount of it can be gleaned by anyone just through the explicit elements

Dude, weed, lmao

its the quintessential "is this nigga serious" face

There's a fine line between and and and, and and, and and.

dude it's just a frog cartoon LMAO. have sex.

woulda had to ha'bin

пиздyй c дocки или пиши пo-aнглийcки

teach me sensei

'bruh' or 'really man?....'

these three posts sum up what really goes up in the minds of people that receive some new idea about a particular reality.
The first one is just codifies the novel information into complete nonsense, similar to how a normie reacts to a stoner. Now, this isn't because the stoner is actually saying shit, it's because he's high, his prespective is changed to extraordinary levels, where you would have to be on a similar state of mind to grasp.
The second one a man who has accepted his inner beast. He does not care about the world in an intellectual way, but instead just wants to satify his impulses. He's hungry? he eats. He's horny? He wanks. He witnessess something ugly? Wrath takes hold of him. The culmination of these actions makes me believe that his mind works by association of feeling and the images that passes through his eyes. That's his internal logic. So when he is confronted with this new information, his brain goes: "what is this nonsense?!?! That's just a frog!". In conclusion, this man just takes the world for what it is, the world is a children's comic book.
For the final one, it's clear: He is already a thinking man. He gets that this new information might be something new. He wants to learn.

If you feel uncomfortable with the pronouns used, just change them in your head, I'm too lazy.

i liek frobgy fren

It's been funny to watch so many people argue about Guénon and let yourselves get into so many arguments about him without really understanding him. Guénon's works are largely just an indirect commentary on the works of Ibn Arabi and Adi Shankara, in a similar way to how Evola is largely just an indirect commentary on and a response to Guénon. You'll never fully understand what exactly Guénon means and why he writes all the stuff that he does unless you read at least few thousand pages of writing from both of these thinkers. It seems like the the vast majority of people who read Guénon don't so this which IMO is why so many people seem to become befuddled or angry after reading Guénon's writings and why there are so many ad hominem arguments thrown at him.

I laugh every time I see people write stuff like "w-well uh he never fully explained intellectual intuition" or "he never solidly proved his ideas using logic according to my degenerated and emasculated empiricism"; that's besides the point!, Guénon was not writing to convince people who didn't agree with him, he couldn't care less about those people. His writing is aimed at fellow autodidacts who already read a huge amount of esoteric/metaphysics and who will actually read much the eastern thinkers he references. When you read Ibn Arabi and Shankara they literally take you by the hand and walk you through all the stages of understanding of all the stuff that Guénon explains and mentions in passing; it immediately becomes apparent once you read enough of them why exactly Guénon wrote what he did, many of the ideas that people consider to be his unique idea actually already appear in the works of these two thinkers where they are explained in even more depth than Guénon's treatment of them. I see many people complain or have criticisms of Guénon that he never demonstrates this eastern 'divine intellect' etc or 'metaphysical realization', that's because it's only something that very bright and motivated people can understand if they have the willpower and power of comprehension required to read through large amounts of both Ibn Arabi and Shankara; two sages who evade comprehension by the intellectually-dogmatic and dull-minded!

I want to accomplish my dreams, but I don't have any willpower.How do i GET OUT OF THIS SITUATION?

>I'm to lazy*

>I wonder if they do do it