From what I know of Vladimir_M, to the extent he’s a Catholic, he believe Catholicism is intersubjectively true. He doesn’t take simulation hypothesis/accusal trade/SL5 type arguments all that seriously if that’s what you’re asking.
That sounds right. I think I’m what you’d get if you took Vladimir_M’s views on hermeneutics but with a perspective on metaphysics that saw them as potentially actually correct rather than acting almost-without-exception as convenient Schelling focal points.
One big difference is that you want to immanentize the eschaton going so far as to invoke actual theology, whereas Vladimir_M would probably he extremely skeptical of such attempts, and quiet frankly so would I.
(ETA: Deleted paragraph comparing myself to Hitler because apparently that sort of thing is easily misunderstood or something.)
If you think my trying to immanentize the eschaton has a decent chance of being seen in retrospect as obviously evil and retarded, then I’m morally obligated to pester you to see whether the outside view of inside view makes more sense here. But perhaps we should continue this in another venue, if you’d like. I find it to be a very interesting topic, and also very important to what I do with my life.
ETA: In the meantime I’ll read Ride the Tiger by Julius Evola.
From what I know of Vladimir_M, to the extent he’s a Catholic, he believe Catholicism is intersubjectively true. He doesn’t take simulation hypothesis/accusal trade/SL5 type arguments all that seriously if that’s what you’re asking.
That sounds right. I think I’m what you’d get if you took Vladimir_M’s views on hermeneutics but with a perspective on metaphysics that saw them as potentially actually correct rather than acting almost-without-exception as convenient Schelling focal points.
One big difference is that you want to immanentize the eschaton going so far as to invoke actual theology, whereas Vladimir_M would probably he extremely skeptical of such attempts, and quiet frankly so would I.
(I don’t want to as such, it’s more that I’m extremely afraid of the potential consequences of not doing so.)
I’m also afraid of the consequences of attempting to given how well previous attempts have gone.
(ETA: Deleted paragraph comparing myself to Hitler because apparently that sort of thing is easily misunderstood or something.)
If you think my trying to immanentize the eschaton has a decent chance of being seen in retrospect as obviously evil and retarded, then I’m morally obligated to pester you to see whether the outside view of inside view makes more sense here. But perhaps we should continue this in another venue, if you’d like. I find it to be a very interesting topic, and also very important to what I do with my life.
ETA: In the meantime I’ll read Ride the Tiger by Julius Evola.
Why Julius Evola? If you’re trying to figure out whether to immanentize the eschaton you might want to look at Eric Voegelin.
Extant should be extent.
Sorry, these things bother me.
Thanks, fixed.