Process "philosophy" eternally destroyed!

The same trend is noticeable in the scientific realm: research here is for its own sake far more than for the partial and fragmentary results it achieves; here we see an ever more rapid succession of unfounded theories and hypotheses, no sooner set up than crumbling to give way to others that will have an even shorter life— a veritable chaos amid which one would search in vain for anything definitive, unless it be a monstrous accumulation of facts and details incapable of proving or signifying anything. We refer here of course to speculative science, insofar as this still exists; in applied science there are on the contrary undeniable results, and this is easily understandable since these results bear directly on the domain of matter, the only domain in which modern man can boast any real superiority. It is therefore to be expected that discoveries, or rather mechanical and industrial inventions, will go on developing and multiplying more and more rapidly until the end of the present age; and who knows if, given the dangers of destruction they bear in themselves, they will not be one of the chief agents in the ultimate catastrophe, if things reach a point at which this cannot be averted?

Be that as it may, one has the general impression that, in the present state of things, there is no longer any stability; but while there are some who sense the danger and try to react to it, most of our contemporaries are quite at ease amid this confusion, in which they see a kind of exteriorized image of their own mentality. Indeed there is an exact correspondence between a world where everything seems to be in a state of mere ‘becoming’, leaving no place for the changeless and the permanent, and the state of mind of men who find all reality in this ‘becoming’, thus implicitly denying true knowledge as well as the object of that knowledge, namely transcendent and universal principles. One can go even further and say that it amounts to the negation of all real knowledge whatsoever, even of a relative order, since, as we have shown above, the relative is unintelligible and impossible without the absolute, the contingent without the necessary, change without the unchanging, and multiplicity without unity; ‘relativism’ is self-contradictory, for, in seeking to reduce everything to change, one logically arrives at a denial of the very existence of change; this was fundamentally the meaning of the famous arguments of Zeno of Elea.

Attached: rg.jpg (400x400, 44K)

However, we have no wish to exaggerate and must add that theories such as these are not exclusively encountered in modern times; examples are to be found in Greek philosophy also, the ‘universal flux’ of Heraclitus being the best known; indeed, it was this that led the school of Elea to combat his conceptions, as well as those of the atomists, by a sort of reductio ad absurdum. Even in India, something comparable can be found, though, of course, considered from a different point of view from that of philosophy, for Buddhism also developed a similar character, one of its essential theses being the ‘dissolubility of all things ’. These theories, however, were then no more than exceptions, and such revolts against the traditional outlook, which may well have occurred from time to time throughout the whole of the Kali-Yuga, were, when all is said and done, without wider influence; what is new is the general acceptance of such conceptions that we see in the West today.

It should be noted too that under the influence of the very recent idea of ‘progress’, ‘philosophies of becoming’ have, in modern times, taken on a special form that theories of the same type never had among the ancients: this form, although it may have multiple varieties, can be covered in general by the name ‘evolutionism’. We need not repeat here what we have already said elsewhere on this subject; we will merely recall the point that any conception allowing for nothing other than ‘becoming’ is thereby necessarily a ‘naturalistic’ conception, and, as such, implies a formal denial of whatever lies beyond nature, in other words the realm of metaphysics— which is the realm of immutable and eternal principles. We may point out also, in speaking of these anti-metaphysical theories, that the Bergonian idea of pure duration’ corresponds exactly with that dispersion in instantaneity to which we alluded above; a pretended intuition modeled on the ceaseless flux of the things of the senses, far from being able to serve as an instrument for obtaining true knowledge, represents in reality the dissolution of all possible knowledge.

This leads us to repeat an essential point on which not the slightist ambiguity must be allowed to persist: intellectual intuition, by which alone metaphysical knowledge is to be obtained, has absolutely nothing in common with this other ‘intuition’ of which certain contemporary philosophers speak: the latter pertains to the sensible realm and in fact is sub-rational, whereas the former, which is pure intelligence, is on the contrary supra-rational. But the moderns, knowing nothing higher than reason in the order of intelligence, do not even conceive of the possibility of intellectual intuition, whereas the doctrines of the ancient world and of the Middle Ages, even when they were no more than philosophical in character, and therefore incapable of effectively calling this intuition into play, nevertheless explicitly recognized its existence and its supremacy over all the other faculties. This is why there was no rationalism before Descartes, for rationalism is a specifically modern phenomenon, one that is closely connected with individualism, being nothing other than the negation of any faculty of a supra- individual order. As long as Westerners persist in ignoring or denying intellectual intuition, they can have no tradition in the true sense of the word, nor can they reach any understanding with the authentic representatives of the Eastern civilizations, in which everything, so to speak, derives from this intuition, which is immutable and infallible in itself, and the only starting-point for any development in conformity with traditional norms

Where did he write this

guenon is a retarded larper

Terrible writing and reasoning. No idea why Yea Forums memes on this guy so much.

Not an argument

Its from 'The Crisis of the Modern World' (quite a good read if I say so myself)

seething

You're looking at it. Guenonfag is 10 times more valuable than the twaddle he draws from .

Holy based. Thank God for Guenon and his bro Parmenides for retroactively popping the veritable pimple that is process philosophy.

Guenon's insight is nothing but superficial. There is not much to say about him he is just a dumb reactionary. That whole passage all basically says "dude muh tradition" "dude these moderns are so dumb they dont know the truth like me" "dude us esotericsts are so much better we know REAL knowledge"

Ever wonder why school teaches plebs to be secular?

God Almighty I hate the guenon cult in this board

Once you are well read in Vedantic and Sufi metaphysics you see that it toally crumples up into a ball and throws into the trashcan nonsensical delusions like processinism

If you had an actual hunger for knowledge and weren't just another zoomer meme barnacle on the guenon bandwagon, you'd actually be interested in what an obviously intelligent man like Whitehead is trying to communicate

how will Wh*teheadians ever recover?

Funny how these traditionalists rail against modernism but their philosophy is enabled by modernism, such as the collection of ancient Eastern texts, and irreligiousness among the general population allowing a white Frenchman like guenon to go be a Muslim. traditionalists are like kids in a theme park of perennial fun and other cultures philosophies are the rides

people in ancient times from europe and middle east have traveled to india for spiritual purposes too bro

what happened to guenon's daughters? did they end up slutting around in paris or something or got married to some allahu akbar down in cairo?

Attached: GuénonetFilles.jpg (567x691, 68K)

See. Personal attacks solely, as always.

I married her, we have tantric sex every night, our son is already a child prodigy, taking after his grandfather

Case in point. Never change, quen- I mean guenonfag.

so she married a delusional hippie?

If the west had genuine living traditions there would be no need to seek them out in such a manner. What's your point here?