What exactly is anti-modernism even...

What exactly is anti-modernism even? What exactly are the attributes of modernism that it is rejecting and what kinds of solutions are proposed?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=3r9L8lPCY_M
youtube.com/user/CSLewisDoodle/videos
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

I don't much, but from what I do know you have the early modern era beginning around roughly the 1500s, The modern era and post modern era which began around the 1960s. This 500 yeaish time-frame brought with it certain ways of thinking which some people reject.

Equality, democracy, the concept of universal or natural rights, being true or good concepts, the idea that rationality can solve all social problems, rejections of traditional religions, rejections of monarchy, etc etc.

I don't agree with all of the above ideas, but I agree with some of them and can answer any questions you have.

>democracy
This isn't modern though.

None of those ideas are, but they are considered modern because they first became widely popular in this era.

I can see the rejection of equality and democracy but how are natural rights rejected at all? Natural Rights aren't a modern thing and even the traditionalist monarchists believe in Natural Law in a Christian/Scholastic sense.

Further, how exactly IS democracy and equality rejected? On what grounds and with what in favor instead?

It rejects the concept that all of lifes problems can be broken down to a theory that can then be implemented. It rejects the idea of human nature as something that should be reprogrammed. And it distrusts when people talk about their own objectivism and rationality. Modernism was a reaction to theocracy and religion in general. Logic was supposed to replace faith, and science/philosophy was supposed to replace the church. But the supposedly rational and objective atheist ideologies just became in effect, their own godless religion. Very sure of their own rationality, they believed they should be in charge of the world. And it didn't go well. So now we have skeptical movements about this kind of stuff

Well i agree with all that

somehow it broke down into the idea things aren't objectively knowable, so all random behavior is just good automatically, which I never followed

>But the supposedly rational and objective atheist ideologies just became in effect, their own godless religion. Very sure of their own rationality, they believed they should be in charge of the world. And it didn't go well.

Any argument for this? This sounds ridiculous and baseless.

You mean post-modernism, not modernism.

Albert Mohler, a Christian theologian and philosopher explains it all.

youtube.com/watch?v=3r9L8lPCY_M

>Natural Rights aren't a modern thing and even the traditionalist monarchists believe in Natural Law in a Christian/Scholastic sense.

Sort of, not really. You won't find any traditionalist going on about human rights.

As for how equality is rejected and why, it depends.

Cultural relativism, moral relativism, the idea that truth doesn't exist. Post-modernism, hyper subjectivity, basically atheism + nihilism on steroids.

Notice how people now say "X is objectively the best" whereas before we just said "X is the best".

This is what happens when you reject Biblical Judeo-Christian morals, values and the American Protestant/Puritan ethics.

Lewis predicted this would happen, the rise of SJWs and all of its consequences and immorality.

>Murder of babies
>Feminism
>Sodomites
>Trannies
>Degenerate behavior
>Identity politics
>Race-baiting
Things that were considered unthinkable, evil and unacceptable just a few decades ago, is now commonplace.

Relativism turns everything upside down.

>Lewis predicted this would happen
Nietzsche already extensively wrote about this long before Lewis was even born.

Yeah but Nietzsche was a fedora.

He was also right to be a fedora. God is dead.

(you)

>God is dead
*in my mind

So... this... is the power... of Christian apologetics

Are you upset that Lewis debunked Nietzsche's arguments?

>One of the greatest philosophers to ever rise out of the human race was debunked by mid-tier Northern Irish children's author.

That's funny.

>Nietzsche
hurr i dont believe in god therefore he's dead ((in my mind))

>C.S. Lewis
Actually provides philosophical arguments of political events, theology, human nature and proves the existence of an objective moral law

>One of the greatest philosophers
>neetzsche

HAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Good joke user, really made me laugh.

Of course you'd love Lewis, then again, you're Æutistic

Have you even read Nietzsche?

>Actually provides philosophical arguments of political events, theology, human nature and proves the existence of an objective moral law

>Hurr we know Nazis is bad therefore objective morals exist.

Flawless argumentation from Lewis here.

>laughing out loud
>on an imageboard

God Ælian, I'd feel sorry for you if you weren't such an autistic faggot

>Have you even read Nietzsche?

I have, he's shit tier. Only atheists like him. Theologians don't take him seriously.

And I don't take theologians seriously. How much sense does it make to deduce the logic of something they themselves admit is completely beyond their comprehension? That sounds like someone out right admitting they're scamming you

>Only atheists like him.
You're an idiot if you believe this because Nietzsche is widely acclaimed by virtually everyone except butthurt Christians on Veeky Forums.

>theologians don't take him seriously
Even theologians acknowledge that Nietzsche's works, whether or not you agree with them, have to be given a significant amount of credit.

Even your own shitposts against nihilism and the decline of Christianity are massively influenced by Nietzschean philosophy, even if you're not conscious of it.

Why should I take Nietzsche seriously when Lewis has literally destroyed all his arguments?

don't bother, you're arguing with edgy fedoras who worship
>nietzsche
>freud
>darwin
>marx
because they were anti-God

Because he hasn't. You say this constantly yet whenever anyone confronts you on it you duck out of the argument and post a Thug-Notes tier youtube channel (which hilariously, isn't that different from what the real C.S Lewis did whenever anyone tried to debate him). At this point I don't even think you believe this, it's just a weaksauce attempt at propaganda.

And more importantly part of how I can tell you've never read Nietzsche is because Nietzsche doesn't spend very much time discussing why god doesn't exist, that's already been done to death. He spends the bulk of his philosophy analysing historical and contemporary moral currents with such scope and depth that Lewis barely glances at it in his slim (non-fictional) bibliography. This is something you would actually be very interested in.

Not to mention you DO take Nietzsche seriously, you just don't admit it.
This post is dripping with Nietzschean ideas.

I recommend reading some Julius Evola

>nietzsche
>marx

Yes, atheists worship two diametrically opposed philosophers at once.

youtube.com/user/CSLewisDoodle/videos

It's mostly false but the French Revolution was one hell of a time period.

>This is what happens when you reject Biblical Judeo-Christian morals, values and the American Protestant/Puritan ethics.
>implying that the idea of a single god is unique to Judeo-Christianity
>implying that the core moral teaching of Judeo-Christianity, the golden rule, is unique to Judeo-Christian
>implying that Western values = Biblical values
>what was ancient Greece, ancient Rome, ancient Persia, ancient China and did they have anything to do with Judeo-Christianity
>implying that even within Judeo-Christianity, there is a set of monolithic, homogenous values that everyone agrees on
>implying that Catholics don't work hard when they're the main reason Judeo-Christian values are a thing in the first place
>implying that Anglo-American conservatism is purely Christian when they have no problem with interest banking or the philosophy of Ayn Rand
>implying that many SJWs aren't Christian and manly hardcore conservatives aren't atheists, disproving your entire thesis outright
>implying you have even the faintest idea what the fuck you're talking about, and that you wouldn't have condemned people like Pythagoras, Socrates, Seneca, Avicenna, Locke, Hume, Spinoza, Kant and many others who've done infinitely more for Western values than you could ever hope to do, but would be considered filth because they don't fit into your very narrow and almost entirely flawed category of what Western values are

>can answer any questions you have.
>Sort of, not really.
>it depends.

>replying to this guy's bait
He's in almost every single thread where there's a slight chance religion will be brought up and pretends to be a fundamentalist protestant. Ignore him.

i hate it when ppl confuse modernism with postmodernism

0/10

try harder

>posting a bait image
Where do you think you are? /a/?

I was thinking more of communism/marxism, eugenics, totalitarianism, fascism, behaviourism

that's what sticks out to you as not new? lol.

they are modern as in they are current, but they just aren't ONLY modern

>ancient China
Why are you bringing up an entirely different civilization, I am 100% sure this thread and the post you responded to were referring to Western Civilization, China has its own shit going on, separate from the West (outside of Western influences in the past few centuries of course)

it doesnt exist

>darwin
>anti-God
you should really kill yourself tbqh

>You won't find any traditionalist going on about human rights.

"It can even come about that a created will cancels out, not perhaps the exertion, but the result of divine action; for in this sense, God himself has told us that God wishes things which do not happen because man does not wish them! Thus the rights of men are immense, and his greatest misfortune is to be unaware of them."

-Maistre

>Lumping in Nietzsche and Darwin with those subversive kikes

An hero ASAP

At best you can say he was one reluctantly. He came to the view that his discovery was incompatible with his church's understanding of Genesis.

Nietzche wasn't a fedora.
Nietzche is the parlor-maid who was hiding behind the curtains terrified out of her wits as she witnessed the fedora brutally beat God to death with a bust of Darwin, now standing pointing her finger accusingly at the blood stained murderer and demanding that we all stand up and take action against the ruffian.

>Where has God gone?" he cried. "I shall tell you. We have killed him - you and I. We are his murderers. But how have we done this? How were we able to drink up the sea? Who gave us the sponge to wipe away the entire horizon? What did we do when we unchained the earth from its sun? Whither is it moving now? Whither are we moving now? Away from all suns? Are we not perpetually falling? Backward, sideward, forward, in all directions? Is there any up or down left? Are we not straying as through an infinite nothing? Do we not feel the breath of empty space? Has it not become colder? Is it not more and more night coming on all the time? Must not lanterns be lit in the morning? Do we not hear anything yet of the noise of the gravediggers who are burying God? Do we not smell anything yet of God's decomposition? Gods too decompose. God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we, murderers of all murderers, console ourselves? That which was the holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet possessed has bled to death under our knives. Who will wipe this blood off us? With what water could we purify ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we need to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we not ourselves become gods simply to be worthy of it? There has never been a greater deed; and whosoever shall be born after us - for the sake of this deed he shall be part of a higher history than all history hitherto."

These are not the words of a man celebrating the death of God. These are words of despair.

>Judeo-Christian
>Judeo
theres that meme again

I like you, you have a way with words.

Deny it all you like but the facts remain.