Beyond Speculative Thought and the Need to "Discuss":

Self-Realization, Action & Magic

(from “The Path of Cinnabar”)




[...] I can confidently claim never to have been ‘fooled' by ‘thought', as happens to those who trust thought, but are unaware of the irrational, existential ground of rationality: who are 'being thought' rather than thinking. [...]


In my preface to Theory, I wrote: 'No doubt, mine will seem like a bold claim: what I am suggesting here is that the peak of philosophy is transcendental Idealism, which itself inevitably culminates in Magical Idealism. Beyond Magical Idealism, nothing remains for philosophy - unless, of course, philosophy is to go bankrupt and become the mere expression of personal opinions subject to present contingencies. If a further development beyond Magical Idealism is to be imagined, this will be not a philosophical development, but a kind of action... My duty has been that of leading Western speculative thought towards this further step. I am not suggesting that my work contains all that might be done... But this really is not the point. I believe that my work is enough to allow those who wish to understand to understand. As for all those people who do not wish to understand, were I even to devote the ample time ahead of me to better consolidate and further develop my system, I am sure they would still manage to find things to criticize and refute in my work. The only thing which truly matters is for the need I have pointed out to be addressed; what matters is for individuals to understand the meaning of and the need for the final philosophical step which I have outlined, and to move ahead... I will have the chance, I am sure, to meet again with those people who are truly moving in this direction...’


Just as I had previously ended my brief artistic experience, I now brought my strictly philosophical phase to an end. As I had previously abandoned painting, abstract art and the 'alchemy of words', I now set genuinely speculative work aside once and for all. By then, I had fulfilled the impersonal task that I had felt the need to carry out in the field of philosophy.


How was my doctrine of the Absolute Individual received at the time? It was largely ignored, as was to be expected in the case of any analysis decisively removed from the beaten track. My work was mostly noted by writers who were not specialists in the field. [...] On the other hand, the mainstream press and official culture was always to turn a deaf ear to my work. But this was to be expected. Aside from amateurish attempts at philosophical essay-writing occasionally appearing in newspapers, philosophy in Italy was a profession: the profession of university professors, with their cliques and factions. In order to make oneself known, it was necessary to belong to that milieu, where works are published only as a means for career advancement, and thought is subordinate to teaching. I, of course, did not belong to such a milieu at all.


But would it really have been possible to conceive of a theory of the Absolute Individual entirely removed from the university milieu? In other words, how could I suppose that the mere rigor of some of my deductions might have led some of those petit-bourgeois, those professional men of speculative thought, to abandon their world of ideas and head for unfamiliar adventures? All the extra-philosophical references which abounded in my philosophical system served as a convenient excuse for its ostracism. It was easy to dismiss a system which featured initiation, 'magic' and relics of superstition. The fact that I had presented all these elements in rigorous philosophical terms hardly mattered.  On the other hand, I myself was probably mistaken with regard to those individuals whom I thought my speculative endeavors might benefit in practical terms. Mine was a philosophical introduction to a non-philosophical world: as such, it might prove of genuine use only in those rare cases where philosophy had ultimately led to a profound existential crisis. Yet, I should also have considered a fact of which I only later became aware: that philosophical precedents to my work - i.e., the field of discursive, abstract thought - represented the worst means to positively overcome an existential crisis such as this in the way I suggested - which is to say: by embracing disciplines of self-realization. Besides, my philosophical exposition would have proven equally superfluous to those who had already taken such a step. It is for this reason that I actually advised those individuals who continued to follow my work in the period which followed not to read those three philosophical books of mine at all. In the field that I subsequently approached, there was no need to 'prove' or 'deduce' anything, nor even to 'discuss' anything. Rather, it was a matter of either recognizing or not recognizing certain principles and truths on the basis of one's inclinations, one's inborn sensitivity and inner awakening.

[...]

 

JULIUS EVOLA





 

 

click here to return to JuliusEvola.Net /text archive