Is it good?

Is it good?

Attached: 81H48oy3c8L.jpg (1275x1753, 262K)

yes, and it's the ultimate filter. It requires extensive foreknowledge in history and philosophy.

he's right about pretty much everything

Its very good and underrated but try to take everything he says with a grain of salt. The parts of the book where he discusses about cycles of history and decline are pure hyperboly, since the study of history is infinitely more complex. Ultimately you have to view the book more as an amalgamation of German philosophical currents than pure history.

>The parts of the book where he discusses about cycles of history and decline are pure hyperbole, since the study of history is infinitely more complex.
Essentially yes, but that's the juiciest part.

The best parts in my opinion where the parts of the world form of each civilization. Those were truly eye opening and some of the most original cultural interpretations of what civilization is. Especially the Classical, Magian and Faustian parts. Those were truly excellent and I think really deserve to be studied by historians so they can have a more holistic view on cultural history. Spengler was one of the first to do civilization studies but unfortunately he is buried and forgotten because of the somewhat aphoristic and political proclamations "decline"part.

Most fascinating is Spengler's connection with the Kulturkreis school, a connection that is often understudied and or ignored, because of Spengler's characterization as a "prophet". The guy obviously was up to date with the anthropological and historical research of his time.

I would really like to read it at some point, but I want to fully understand it and be able to form my own opinion on Spengler's argument. What would you recommend having read first? I would imagine that at least Hegel and Marx are necessary first, what should I have read in terms of history?

Unironically start with the Greeks. Spengler also starts with the Greeks.

Its best to go through this book with an open mind and then research all the philosophical and historical tidbits on your own afterwards or while reading it. If you are asking what is the driving force behind this book, the answer is nothing other but Friedrich Nietzsche's philosophy.

Attached: meh.png (2033x660, 1.04M)

Spengler deserves some recognition. He literally solved history.

The other threads are shit, ours here is a comfy little corner of late night Spengler-posting .

Attached: yoshi.jpg (180x280, 8K)

>unabridged reprint never ever

Is the abridged version better?

It has a lot of interesting viewpoints, but the overall idea of history he presents is legitimately retarded.

A person with 90+iq and access to the internet can destroy his view of history in an hour, I'm so sick of the shilling of this loser lately. It's no coincidence that every student that mentioned they like this book in my history undergrad ended up being a complete retard and dropping out quickly
LMAO what??? The only people who enjoy this trash are those that DON'T have extensive knowledge in history and philosophy and are at risk of accepting it's shallow generalizations and flat out wrong facts because it's written in a commanding prose, the have no prior knowledge to judge it's worth with. Take that sorry excuse of a book to literally any historian in any university near you and watch what them get "filtered out". You're such a fucking idiot
He's right about everything to you because you know nothing
Exactly why he attracts so many psueds. Viewing history like he did is inherently attractive to humans
You haven't read a history book since your 10th grade textbook kys

Attached: saberstop.png (580x529, 321K)

He's essentially anti-Marx: A lot of his analysis, logic, and systems are very simplistic and at times shoddy, but every single prediction he made (ever) has come true exactly as he thought it would, from his predicting WWI and WWII to the rise of the American Empire and to a terrorist attack from the Islamic world in New York causing a paradigm shift within the US Empire. This is opposed to Marx who creates this vast system that is entirely logically sound, but has absolutely no predictive power what so ever.

How does pic related compare?

Attached: 243604.jpg (308x475, 28K)

shoddy how?

I don't trust the intellectual opinion from someone who CAPITALIZES words for effect and says lmao

I don't trust the intellectual opinion of people who don't trust the intellectual option of people if they capitalizes words for effect and say lmao. Usually a good sign of a psued who is unable to independently judge the worth of ideas without a signal to authority and intellectual tropes

>shoddy how

Attached: downloadfile-14.png (860x3556, 346K)

How is that shoddy?

Repeat my reply isn't a get gotcha, it just makes you look like an autistic retard
>Usually a good sign of a psued who is unable to independently judge the worth of ideas without a signal to authority and intellectual tropes
If you can't convey your ideas in an intelligent way then what's the worth in considering them?

This person hasn't read it

>The best parts in my opinion where the parts of the world form of each civilization. Those were truly eye opening and some of the most original cultural interpretations of what civilization is. Especially the Classical, Magian and Faustian parts. Those were truly excellent and I think really deserve to be studied by historians so they can have a more holistic view on cultural history.
I agree but it seems like English academics like John Ruskin and Kenneth Clark focused more on contrasting the Classical Greek with the Faustian (Gothic) spirit.

They're almost nothing alike. First you have to ignore people to talk about 'decline' in relation to Spengler, since that's not the appeal, he's not a team player or a doomsayer, he's more like the lead character in that movie 'The Saint', he can think his way into any society that has ever manifested itself.

Yockey has a totally different 'voice', he's like a Gothic radio jockey or a Neoclassical playwright or New Wave film director, Yockey has a very definite Medievalist perspective. It all about a stark, high-contrast presentation of 20th century life and particularly the resurgence of the Classical civilization in the form of the industrial-technical society.

I have, and it's complete trash, nice try though, maybe next time you can form an actual argument to defend your cringelord baldboy

Attached: IMG_20190923_161847.jpg (4032x3024, 3.49M)

>If you can't convey your ideas in an intelligent way then what's the worth in considering them?
Even if they were valuable ideas, we wouldn't be able to access them without emotional, spiritual or intellectual coherence.
He's a butthurt teenager, I wager.

>cat fag
haha you have big gay and your opinions are invalidated by your fagginess

Thanks
Nice cat. I'm gonna post that pic on /an/

You haven't read it mate.

>ego consumed man has entered the thread

Go forth and bicker to all those dumber than you for that is the path of the intellectual, are you not involved in any other forums of discussion? I can only imagine being this annoyed if this is the only place you can go, its Yea Forums move beyond these people, did you honestly believe everyone here will be well read? Anyone can post here anonymously by the way if you didnt remember you could literally be talking to a 14 year old. I don't understand how you can be so well read yet somehow are oblivious to where you are, there are tons of forums with people with deeper and traceable knowledge, you won't need to sit here and make claims that people are uneducated, why choose to be here?

These guys dont participate there because they get exposed when every post is visible its hard to backup your 150 iq claims

>abridged edition

Attached: image.jpg (654x720, 279K)

Enjoy your toxoplasmosis

This is a cat lovers board, begone
Discussing topics like history and philosophy online is literally useless and you have to be a real dumb dumb to think otherwise and not treat everything here like a shitpost. I saw the new meme of the summer and wanted to leave my own pointless opinion with the other pointless opinions. Nobody cares if you aren't well read in a subject unless you're speaking about it with sweeping claims of authority (Spenglerfags) To any 14 year olds reading this, if you like him you're already on the right path. Just keep going and read intently on the civilizations be talks about, don't fall into the immediate trap philosophers with confidence and skill can set you in. It's a jumping off point

Attached: IMG_20190923_170748.jpg (4032x3024, 3.58M)

Aren't you the same retard who posted wow this was depressing what to read next?

Ok the only thing I know of Spengler I read in "Kissinger's Shadow", and he basically said Kissinger got two ideas from Spengler (from memory here):
>It is easy to paralyze yourself into inaction by waiting for more and more information, and so one (and the good statesman necessarily) acts without information often
>There is an actually palpable and significant immaterial/transcendent quality that some men have that makes them good statesmen - it cannot be measured, observed empirically, etc. it just is.

Does this sound right? And if so, am I retarded for rejecting this out of hand?

Sorry I am a brainlet

Attached: 1463762045863.jpg (240x232, 7K)

Holy sugar
I’ve met lots of people who told me I should be in government, and they explain it with “just because”

spengler is a coomer

>A person with 90+iq and access to the internet can destroy his view of history in an hour, I'm so sick of the shilling of this loser lately. It's no coincidence that every student that mentioned they like this book in my history undergrad ended up being a complete retard and dropping out quickly
Yeah I'm about 70 pages into Decline of the West and I sort of agree with this.

I'm not an expert on history or anything, but his method of charting out the patterns of history seem pretty... far-reaching. Just his hyper-pessimistic view seems like a cope for someone who wanted a big-brained reason to imagine themselves as a martyr who's going down with a sinking ship or some shit.

Honestly kind of a stupid book, very interesting thesis though. It made me think about how "history is viewed" or whatever, I guess.

Attached: momoreading.jpg (1521x2048, 762K)

*hyperbole

>user gets exposed to babby's first theory of history

An amusing anecdote about a scholar engaging in "pedantic and external criticism of details" concerns an American, Edith Wharton. Spengler's American publisher, Alfree Knopf, relates the incident: "[Wharton] wrote Spengler upbraiding him for what she called his ignorance of Baroque art. He replied by citing in his support, among other sources, a study in an encyclopedia of widely recognized authority. 'I know,' Mrs. Wharton wrote in reply, 'but I wrote that article, and at the time I was misinformed.'

Attached: IMG_20190924_143236.jpg (3480x4640, 3.14M)