vril sorcerer

We have received the recommendations from an expert panel on how to better protect and empower young people online. Leading academics, practitioners, youth and parent representatives, and specialists from across Europe, assessed the impact of social media on minors and set out practical measures for action.

Nietzschean genealogy was meant to be primarily a psychological back trace: the initial impulse still HAS to be operational. But academics pretend if they can contrive eg Locke or Hobbes as the Root of modern problems, then Disproving them means they’ve “won”; yet no one today is in fact a Lockean nor a “nominalist”

Dyer’s argument could also be taken in the opposite direction once you accept that the “physical” is separate from essence. A transgender person could simply argue: “I am different in soul—my essence—from what I am in body—the physical.”

Jay Dyer on Tucker Carlson: How Medieval Philosophy Nominalism created modern transgender ideology: “Nominalism is the idea that there are only names to things, not essences. So there’s no human nature. No dog nature. The ancient world believed things have real essences. Words described metaphysical reality. Occam started denying that. It influenced Luther. Then Hume, Kant, the Enlightenment… If things don’t have essences, then they don’t have genders objectively — everything is just a name. So I can just name myself he, him, Zer, Z. That’s the logical train from medieval philosophy to postmodern gender ideology. It flies in the face of lived experience. You basically have to be indoctrinated to believe it.”

One reason why conservatives (and right wingers) hate Hegel is that the entire conservative intellectual sphere is all about one-upping each other with increasingly absurd and obscure points in history where everything supposedly went wrong. The rightoids love this stuff because it LOOKS like an explanation for where everything comes from, it's comforting and demystifies the world for them, so the cattle are very impressed when Dyer blames it all on nominalism, Peterson on postmodernism, Prager U on Marxism, Irvin Babbitt on Rousseau, etc. But seeing ideas as necessary answers to problems and contradictions of their time, as part of the historical development of thought, as Hegel did, makes it impossible to participate in this absurd race to the bottom. Nominalism was simply an attempt to answer the problem of universals, which was a real problem which needed a real answer. You cannot expect people to just stop thinking or to stop looking for answers at some arbitrary moment I'm time because you don't like what they come up with to solve contradictions or problems. A proper right winger is someone like Otto von Bismarck. Did he like German nationalism? No. But he made it subservient to Prussian interests and tamed it. Did he like liberalism? No, but he knew he couldn't pretend it wasn't an important force in society and managed them through parliament and mass enfranchisement. Did he like socialism? No, but he knew it responded to the misery of the working classes so he introduced social welfare, etc. He was successful because he recognised that these ideas have their necessary existence. Rather than try to fight them as these aberrations that shouldn't, he mastered them.