Comment on Anon reads nihilist philosophy
schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works 4 hours agoThe term “broicism” is implicitly a critique. I don’t know much about the stoics, but I understand it has a bit more emotional complexity where as broicism is just machistic indifference repackaged. Here’s one article: trillmag.com/…/broicism-the-manospheres-obsession…
I think all monotheisms are toxic; not sure how you think Christianity and Judaism are different, architecturally speaking. It just cracks me up that Jesus explicitly talks about all the ways religion is misused (Good Samaritan, Pharisees, etc.), he lays it out and black and white, and it just gets ignored. Not to mention how its used to support hierarchy when smashing hierarchy is absolutely in the text; but it’s complicated because the appropriation of Jesus was well underway when the bible was decided on. I think if Jesus was able to self-publish his memoirs, Christianity would never have gotten off the ground.
sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz 3 hours ago
Sweeeet, I’ve been curious about this since my first assumption has always been that “Bros” just were doing Stoicism in its best possible interpretation. Maybe I’m too critical of it and not of them.
That’s valid and a pretty widely agreed on belief. I tend to make a few more concessions for Hebrew and Catholicism because they have controls and political structures for negating barbarism built in to their scriptures, even if those controls have failed in both past and recent history.
The difference with Christianity from those is you’re given leave by the text to engage selectively and do post-modern interpretations of what Jesus wants or the personal cost of not living up to his expectations. Like it’s not that he’s being ignored, it’s that his sacrifice canceled any price I have to pay for my actions in this life. You’re right, though. The person Christ was pretty different from the faith that inherited his name, they probably wouldn’t have had much to do with eachother if he had a choice in the matter. But mainly because he was a Jew.
schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works 3 hours ago
I’m not sure what concessions Catholicism has. It built itself into a major political player and was the spiritual foundation of the feudal system and king’s right to rule… and this for over a thousand years.
The Catholic Church was aware there was stuff in the bible that wouldn’t go in its favor, which is why they killed anyone who tried to translate it into a popular language… At the same time, all these priests and bishops and cardinals and popes COULD read it, and they consistently chose to support their own power. Very human, that, craving power above all else.
One defining weirdness of Christianity is the emphasis is puts on FAITH, on protestations of belief. I don’t think even Judaism cares that much about it.
But the religious situation around Jesus’ time was absolutely WILD. I’d start with The Life of Brian, but then read about the Gnostic Gospels. There were cults springing up all over the place, each with their own vibe-coded stories that were ChatGPTd from prevailing culture. I think thinking of “Judaism” as an unitary religion/culture is a bit of anachronism.
sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz 3 hours ago
Alright this is going to be a bit of an indulgent bpersonal diatribe, but hear me out. Generally when I’m assessing the worth of religion I try to look at the cost/benefit of it existing, not really whether it’s factually true or politically just. Catholicism definitely full of lies and its atrocities are really the same as any monarchist structure and equally indefensible. Also as you say, craven.
But here’s what people within it at the very bottom are getting from the deal:
Agreed, though. That’s kind of one of the things I appreciate about Judaism, the pluralism and the de-emphasis on Faith. I’ve been dipping my toes tentatively into some Gnostic histories, and proto Christian stuff. I’ll look at the Gnostic Gospels next, then. Do you have a personal favorite little blorbo from cults of that period?
schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works 3 hours ago
I thought I’d get a lot out of reading the Gnostic texts directly, but it was mostly the same religious garbage I’ve outgrown. One thing that really kills the vibe for me is when people take religion, you know, religiously. Seriously unreadable trash, chapter after chapter about how GREAT God is, as if greatness automatically made something worthy of worship. Servile horseshit.
I got a lot more out the prison planet subreddit, which is sort of gnosticism redux for people with obvious delusion and people like me, interested in the power of a radically different perspective.
It’s really interesting that imagining the world as a place created as a prison to torture us IMMEDIATELY makes so much more sense than the tri-omni God of traditional Christiainity, but offering that as a possibility had to be heavily regulated at the edge of a sword… makes you realize how much of religious debate is based on a very narrow range of choices. Pascal’s Wager works in the popular imagination because the bedrock assumption is that there is only one God that exists and that we are choosing to believe in the right one. When you consider infinite gods and infinite risks of choosing the wrong one, the wager falls apart.