The Philosophy of Philipp Mainländer with Roel Theeuwen 

This might also interest you as a strange esoteric Christian text The essay in which Borges mentioned Philipp Mainländer is "Biathanatos". Biathanatos is a very odd Christian text in favor of some form of suicide. Here's the first two paragraph of Borges' essay as an introduction: "I owe to De Quincey (to whom my debt is so vast that to point out only one part of it may appear to repudiate or silence the others) my first notice of Biathanatos, a treatise composed at the beginning of the seventeenth cen­ tury by the great poet John Donne,' who left the manuscript to Sir Robert Carr without other restriction than that it be given "to the Press or the Fire." Donne died in 1631; in 1642 civil war broke out; in 1644, the poet's firstborn son gave the old manuscript to the press to save it from the fire. Biathanatos extends to about two hundred pages; De Quincey ( Writings VIII, 336) abridges them thus: Suicide is one of the forms of homicide; the canonists make a distinction between willful murder and justifiable homicide; by parity of reason, suicide is open to distinctions of the same kind. Just as not every homicide is a murder, not every suicide is a mortal sin. Such is the apparent thesis of Biathanatos; this is declared by the subtitle ( That Self­ homicide is not so Naturally Sin that it may never be otherwise), and is illus­ trated or overtaxed by a learned catalog of fabled or authentic examples, ranging from Homer,> "who had written a thousand things, which no man else understood, and is said to have hanged himself because he understood not the fishermen's riddle," to the pelican, symbol of paternal love, and the bees, which, according to St. Ambrose's Hexameron, put themselves to death "when they find themselves guilty of having broken any of their king's Laws." The catalog takes up three pages, and in them I note this vanity: the inclusion of obscure examples ("Festus, Domitianus' minion, who killed himself only to hide the deformity of a Ringworm in his face") and the omission of others that are more forcefully persuasive-Seneca, Themis­ tocles, Cato-but which may have seemed too obvious. Epictetus ("Remember the essential thing: the door is open") and Schopenhauer ("Is Hamlet's soliloquy the meditation of a criminal?") have defended suicide in copious pages; the foregone certainty that these defend­ ers are in the right makes us read them negligently. That was my case with Biathanatos until I perceived, or thought I perceived, an implicit or esoteric argument beneath the obvious one."

Just when you think Mainlander is as forgotten a philosopher as one can find, there's Bahnsen lmao

Ugh, please do!

It's coming this October/November. Keep an eye on r/Mainländer, It is translated by an Australian scholar, Christian Romuss. “Dear All, I'm pleased to inform you that the first volume of Philipp Mainländer's The Philosophy of Redemption will be published in October or November this year by Irukandji Press, a small not-for-profit company of which I am co-owner and which publishes Synkrētic: The Journal of Indo-Pacific Philosophy, Literature & Cultures. Contrary to my claims in earlier emails, I have decided to stagger the releases of the two volumes. I am now working full time, and it has proven difficult with the burden this and other commitments place on my time to advance with the translation of the second volume as quickly as I had hoped. Since I have the first volume translated, I will instead apply myself to the editing and preparation of it for an October/November release. The second volume will be published sometime in 2023. I will make further announcements around an exact date, ISBN and other bibliographic data closer to October, when I will also (hopefully) be able to share the cover design and some sample content with you. Thank you for your patience and interest in this project. Sincerely, Christian Romuss”

Read this book WELTSCHMERZ By FREDERICK C. BEISER

@@low3242 thanks for the update my dude

@@halestorm123 btw ordered that book, ill give it a read some time

@@low3242 I have a full PDF from DocDroid.

Sad boi hour commences

You are all sad there.

​@@tam-tam1970Not sad per se but rather realistic. Continental philosophy (Europe) shares this reserved, pessimistic view of the world. America is too stuck on this goofy notion of happiness and positive thinking and what not, forgetting that in the end it is all but an illusion shared amongst people for a brief moment, which is life.

Félicien Rops.

Death is your annihilation. It's definitely not a good thing or event. The best option is not being born. Anything other than that sucks one way or another. Whether it's life or death.

Fanu lui Cioran nr 1 Xd, You are right. He didn't advocate suicide as a categorical imperative and he does not name it explicitly as a virtue. He believed that morality is subjectively discovered when reasoning about the will. Once it is unmasked as the will to death, one becomes aware of the 'real' movement of the universe and finds that it is a transition from being into nothingness. He then states that the ultimate realization of the greater good is to act in accordance with this universal movement i.e. affirm the will to death, thus implying suicide. However, he believes few will come to this realization. Instead, most people do not unmask the will to life, and act out of pure self interest. In doing so they weaken the collective (homo homini lupus). Thus, there's no need to have a should or ought. In the end, both moral and immoral people are driven by the will to death. The difference is that the moral ones are aware of it.

Thanks Roel. I think his philosophy on the good life (how one should live their live) is based on being at peace with the world and yourself. For him that was being close to the will to death and realising it. I consider that even if people affiirm it by suicide or by just being aware of it and not having children. Or they don't. They will still decay and die. Contributing by their existence or ending of their existence to the entropy/death of the universe. It's still surprising for me that he managed to basically reason a lot of stuff that seems to fit into the later understanding of the universe. But at the same time. He didn't do it strictly or scientifically enough to be considered solid science. I also don't think the current models suggest the complete annihilation of the universe he had in mind. Or the finitude of the universe. Although it certainly is intresting and drives me to want to engage with physics on a deeper level. Also math.

He (Theeuwen) is very wrong on that. Mainlander never said the ideal is just suicide. Like Schopenhauer, he felt very empathetic about men that decided to take their lives. This is a translation (amateur) from my Spanish copy of TPR: «Immanent philosophy cannot afford to condemn (suicide), nor can it. *It does not call for suicide* ; but for the sake of truth, it should destroy those powerful and fearsome reasons that oppose it.» Overall, I think this podcast could've been done better. Mainlander's writings on religion and aesthetics are far more interesting and insightful than the attention received here.

@Sygg Kvisling "Witchfinder" Nielsen Reversed in order or opposite in meaning. An example of inverting a light switch would be turning it from on to off. Inverting the truth would be saying that the opposite of the truth is true

الإنتحار

Inshallah 🙏🏼

​@@sunilbabu1818بعد ان اموت سوف ارتاح من الفلسطينيين والاتراك والبوسنيين والالبان والباكستانيين والماليزيين والافغان والاندونيسيين والشعوب الجرمانية واتمنى ان اكون بجانب فيليب ماينلاندر اليهودي العظيم