If there really is a hell in which hypocrites suffer, let modern society know where it will unleash its word and implement its conventions. Hypocrisy is the substance of this so-called marketing age and is ingrained in the very core of its foundation. Without hypocrisy, there are no social relations anymore: it is by it that modern man displays his intelligence and good manners. “Age of marketing”, and hypocrisy is a beautiful definition of marketing. The world would be more honest if the good worker would say, “I work with hypocrisy management”. But of course he never will. The good worker cannot even be honest with his fellow workers, with his neighbors, with his friends, with his family… Can hell hold so many people? On the other hand, there are two paths for the modern non-hypocrite: (1) operate a total annihilation of social relations or (2) live normally, under the penalty of being widely hated in all circles, if not unemployed or beggar. Outside of this is history…
Tag: philosophy
The Obsession With Reasoning From Every Possible Angle Is the Death…
The obsession with reasoning from every possible angle is the death of reasoning: there are no limits to thought, the points of view are never exhausted. This is why any treatise or system that claims to be complete is doomed to failure from the start. Broad reasoning requires the confrontation of opposing propositions and invariably cancels them out one by one when approached with impartiality. If broadens the work, it broadens by annihilating itself and showing itself to be increasingly flawed. For every valid reasoning there is an equally valid contrary reasoning. If the thinker opts for comprehensiveness, he must necessarily give up assertiveness—and, consequently, potency.
Morally Man Measures Himself Less by His Affinities…
Morally, man is measured less by his affinities than by his repulsions. We know him by looking at what he rejects or, in other words, what is contrary to his character. His friends tell less about him than his adversaries, what he does less than what he peremptorily refuses to do. Moral sympathizes with caution and rejects with convulsing nerves.
Building a Fragmentary Work
The thinker gains a lot by choosing, as Nietzsche and Cioran did, to build a fragmentary work. Letting go of the presumptuous and counterproductive delirium of attainable unity, i.e., of supposedly attainable perfection, the thinker can concentrate on conferring precision and potency to small fragments. Moreover, the superiority of a collection of aphorisms over an essay is indisputable: the latter hardly ever justifies rereading; the former’s innate multiplicity makes complete assimilation impossible all at once. Furthermore: building in fragments makes it possible to precisely settle the disparate and complicated mental movements, while developing and deepening a single reasoning certainly imposes a limit—that is, it forces the mind to dismiss a large part of its manifestations.