What author can turn me christian? Dostoevsky? Kierkegaard? I need thinking man's christianity, not pleb christianity.
Why not just read both?
What is your issue, what do you feel you're lacking in life?
Do you need guidance, morals? Hope? What do you seek?
>>7724737
Eternal life.
>>7724732
The Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man almost made a Christian
Read Tolstoi, he was a good christian.
Why not Ivan Ilich death?
>>7724732
>thinking
>christianity
>>7724833
leave this thread and go back to masturbating to richard dawkins
>>7724732
PKD
Hegel is pretty much the opus of rationalist Christianity, if you read him how she should be read and not how Zizek tell you. Also de Maistre if you want dat prose.
>>7724874
thank you
>>7724874
What are the modal "teachings" of Hegel? I kind of think of him as someone who wants to order possibly naively nonsensical human notions, i.e. a kind of anti-Wittgenstein.
And what does Zizek really tell you, and what's wrong about it iyho?
>>7724928
>And what does Zizek really tell you, and what's wrong about it iyho?
Zizek maintains some sort of materialism based on hegelian metaphysics, while saying metaphysics don't exist and that that's the best way metaphysics can be a real force. It's too subversive to read Hegel from Zizek if don't already have read Hegel raw.
>I kind of think of him as someone who wants to order possibly naively nonsensical human notions
Nah, most of the bullshit Hegel arranges in sentences were quite common(if eccentric) terminology for the last centuries. I personally think the main thing in Hegels Christianity is that all religions and myth were Christianity in becoming and that was reasonable, since Geist becomes and is not is at the start. His way of viewing Christianity kill the stupid argument about "why believe Christianity is right, when there were thousand religions before it". The only religion that escapes this critique is Islam.
>>7724971
>His way of viewing Christianity kill the stupid argument about "why believe Christianity is right, when there were thousand religions before it".
Can you elaborate more on this?
>>7724774
>i can't just decide to start believing, im not ready for that yet
can you expand upon this?
>>7724971
>all religions and myth were Christianity in becoming and that was reasonable, since Geist becomes and is not is at the start. His way of viewing Christianity kill the stupid argument about "why believe Christianity is right, when there were thousand religions before it". The only religion that escapes this critique is Islam.
tell me more
>>7724833
Ha! Good one, sir! Somebody has to set these ignorant plebs straight. Pea-brained sheep, am i right, eh? Welp, back to Sam Harris i go!
>>7724732
Who would you consider a pleb christian? Author-wise i mean?
>>7724979
Every new world-important religion(apart from animism which was still in the world of art and magic) came from a dialectical battle of contradictions in a previous religion. The new synthesis(mode of being of the particular) is better and closer to the End of History than the last situation, but till it reaches the perfect religion it will go the same way into a new contradiction. Art leads to mythos which leads to religion forming, which leads eventually to logos(the instrument of philosophy). Art and mythos got perfected with the Greeks, while religion perfected itself into Protestant Christianity. Only Philosophy is left un-perfected.
Also God itself was operating before humans were human(doesn't matter if he made them or evolution did) and this if religion ends in Christianity then what religion is real and actual it is true.
>>7724732
All well known Christian authors are excellent intellectuals.
Also novels in themselves won't turn you into one.
It's a long process that is equally intellectual as it is mystical.
>>7725052
>All well known Christian authors are excellent intellectuals.
Dunno if this sarcasm, but its a hell of a generalization if it isn't, pal
>>7725089
Which of the well known philosophers and writers throughout the centuries aren't at least somewhat good?
>>7724732
Kierkegaard, Merton
Shit guy, maybe im just being pedantic but by the term Christian authors you're including all of the modern evangelists and pop-christian writers of today. And to say that they are all "excellent intellectuals" is a heck of a statement
>>7725122
I'm not American and we really have no protestantism here so my perception may differ.
But when I said popular Christian authors I primarily means those from past centuries who have retained a popularity, such as Chesterton, Belloc, Elliott, Wolfe, Augustine, Aquinas, Merton, John of the Cross and so on.
And even modern pleb Christian stuff that I find in bookshops here is generally not terrible, just aimed at plebs.
Isaac Bashevis Singer
>>7724833
>that fat guy with a hat.png
>>7724732
Dostoevsky will certainly give you food for thought, but it's not guaranteed to turn you.
Upon review, Crime and Punishment is exactly 150 years old, right now.
t. fedora who has read and understood three Dostoevsky novels
I need help with Kierkegaard. I'm half way through Fear and Trembling. Here's what I've understood. He's created a hierarchy of modes of thought. Aesthetic, ethic, absurd or something like that. The Isaac story is to show how it does not work in any way except the absurd. It can't be viewed as a teleological suspension of ethics, it's too grotesque to be aesthetically motivated, etc. What he concludes is the necessary absurdity of God and that Abraham resigned himself to the absurd, which I think is what the "infinite" refers to, but in doing so returned to the world or something. The infinite vs finite talk is what doesn't make sense to me.
So as a novice reading Kierkegaard in English, how am I doing?
Gene Wolfe
Tolkien :^)
>>7725341
>which I think is what the "infinite" refers to, but in doing so returned to the world or something
Infinite in the absurd, since it doesn't have an end, which is an absolute God reached with faith. Finite God is usually le ebin rationally defined God, which is something kirk hates. The ethical is also finite and objective, unlike the subjective infinite.
It's a meme attack on Hegel, don't dwell on the concrete meaning of the words.
Chesterton
>>7724774
>strength and patience
read the stoics
>>7724874
>how she
>>7724833
It's amazing how little effort you need to bait people these days.
Read Aquinas, Gogol, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy and watch Tarkovsky.
