THE JEW FEARS ARETE

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arete

Arete (Greek: ἀρετή), in its basic sense, means "excellence of any kind".[1] The term may also mean "moral virtue".[1] In its earliest appearance in Greek, this notion of excellence was ultimately bound up with the notion of the fulfillment of purpose or function: the act of living up to one's full potential.

The term from Homeric times onwards is not gender specific. Homer applies the term of both the Greek and Trojan heroes as well as major female figures, such as Penelope, the wife of the Greek hero Odysseus. In the Homeric poems, Arete is frequently associated with bravery, but more often with effectiveness.

In particular, the aristocratic class was presumed, essentially by definition, to be exemplary of arete: "The root of the word is the same as aristos, the word which shows superlative ability and superiority, and aristos was constantly used in the plural to denote the nobility."[4]

By the 5th and 4th centuries BC, arete as applied to men had developed to include quieter virtues, such as dikaiosyne (justice) and sophrosyne (self-restraint).

It was commonly believed that the mind, body, and soul each had to be developed and prepared for a man to live a life of arete. This led to the thought that athletics had to be present in order to obtain arete. They did not need to consume one's life, merely exercise the body into the right condition for arete, just like the mind and soul would be exercised by other means.[7]

Arete is a significant part of the paideia of ancient Greeks: the training of the boy to manhood. This training in arete included physical training, for which the Greeks developed the gymnasion; mental training, which included oratory, rhetoric, and basic sciences; and spiritual training, which included music and what is called virtue.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicomachean_Ethics

The Nicomachean Ethics (/ˌnɪkoʊˈmækiən/; Ancient Greek: Ἠθικὰ Νικομάχεια) is the name normally given to Aristotle's best-known work on ethics. The work, which plays a pre-eminent role in defining Aristotelian ethics, consists of ten books, originally separate scrolls, and is understood to be based on notes from his lectures at the Lyceum.

The theme of the work is a Socratic question previously explored in the works of Plato, Aristotle's friend and teacher, of how men should best live. In his Metaphysics, Aristotle described how Socrates, the friend and teacher of Plato, had turned philosophy to human questions, whereas pre-Socratic philosophy had only been theoretical. Ethics, as now separated out for discussion by Aristotle, is practical rather than theoretical, in the original Aristotelian senses of these terms.[1] In other words, it is not only a contemplation about good living, because it also aims to create good living. It is therefore connected to Aristotle's other practical work, the Politics, which similarly aims at people becoming good. Ethics is about how individuals should best live, while the study of politics is from the perspective of a law-giver, looking at the good of a whole community.

The Nicomachean Ethics is widely considered one of the most important historical philosophical works, and had an important impact upon the European Middle Ages, becoming one of the core works of medieval philosophy. It therefore indirectly became critical in the development of all modern philosophy as well as European law and theology.

The first philosopher to write ethical treatises, Aristotle argues that the correct approach for studying such controversial subjects as Ethics or Politics, which involve discussing what is beautiful or just, is to start with what would be roughly agreed to be true by people of good up-bringing and experience in life, and to work from there to a higher understanding.[4][5]

Taking this approach, Aristotle begins by saying that the highest good for humans, the highest aim of all human practical thinking, is eudaimonia, a Greek word often translated as well-being or happiness. Aristotle in turn argues that happiness is properly understood as an ongoing and stable dynamic, a way of being in action (energeia), specifically appropriate to the human "soul" (psuchē), at its most "excellent" or virtuous (virtue translates aretē in Greek). If there are several virtues then the best and most complete or perfect of them will be the happiest one. An excellent human will be a person good at living life, who does it well and beautifully (kalos). Aristotle says that such a person would also be a serious (spoudaios) human being, in the same sense of "serious" that one contrasts serious harpists with other harpists.

Attached: 3.png (1024x952 3.94 MB, 121.58K)

Because semites are a patriarchy. Look at the way they talk about women on Zig Forums…look at the way they behave and how retarded their male dominated breeding programs have utterly devastated their IQ and creativity leading to the mongrelization and race mixing and eventual slide into complete obscurity of their entire race.

Attached: Jewish_IQ_in_Israel.jpg (800x800, 159.5K)

THE JEWS FEAR THE SAMURAI

Attached: download.jpeg (665x374 10.39 KB, 32.54K)

This board is now 90% shills user. Start it up on /tok/

Bump for excellence

...

It's way past midnight so I might be a little dumb with the above
At any rate, stellar thread OP

Civilization is literally the result of the best of the best winning and then having so many kids that their infighting would've been so excellently destructive and thorough that it would have caused the death of their ethnicity/tribe/race completely.

Beta males are not 'low on the totem pole', they're alphas in waiting/preparation. There were two Alphas in Sparta; the two kings. The rest were Betas, but compared to non-Spartans they were easily capable Alphas.

gtfo.

"Today, we live in the Age of Envy.

“Envy” is not the emotion I have in mind, but it is the clearest manifestation of an emotion that has remained nameless; it is the only element of a complex emotional sum that men have permitted themselves to identify.

Envy is regarded by most people as a petty, superficial emotion and, therefore, it serves as a semihuman cover for so inhuman an emotion that those who feel it seldom dare admit it even to themselves. . . . That emotion is: hatred of the good for being the good.

This hatred is not resentment against some prescribed view of the good with which one does not agree. . . . Hatred of the good for being the good means hatred of that which one regards as good by one’s own (conscious or subconscious) judgment. It means hatred of a person for possessing a value or virtue one regards as desirable.

If a child wants to get good grades in school, but is unable or unwilling to achieve them and begins to hate the children who do, that is hatred of the good. If a man regards intelligence as a value, but is troubled by self-doubt and begins to hate the men he judges to be intelligent, that is hatred of the good.

The nature of the particular values a man chooses to hold is not the primary factor in this issue (although irrational values may contribute a great deal to the formation of that emotion). The primary factor and distinguishing characteristic is an emotional mechanism set in reverse: a response of hatred, not toward human vices, but toward human virtues.

To be exact, the emotional mechanism is not set in reverse, but is set one way: its exponents do not experience love for evil men; their emotional range is limited to hatred or indifference. It is impossible to experience love, which is a response to values, when one’s automatized response to values is hatred."
-(((Ayn Rand)))

Hello Omega

good thread

Woman hating is not patriarchy you worthless share blue antifa feminist kike. How many times do you have to be spotted before you realize your idiotic posts always give you away?


Hello worthless retard.

Sorry, did I intrude on your precious 'objective deontology' for ethics and beauty?

Did you grow a peacock's plume recently?

yes

sorry, but ends never justify means. we stand before eternity here.

Never should have taught niggers to read or write.

Attached: cloaca.png (610x398, 406.39K)

kek'd but disgusting. spoiler that shit.

...

good thread. i always enjoy posts about ancient history because only 3% of your average Japanese watercolor imageboard readers have even read 1 book last year, and the majority have not read more than a dozen books in their lifetimes. meanwhile these same readers have beat hundreds of video games, can recite lines from dozens of movies and electric jew shows, and know the latest gossip about fad e-celebs. threads like yours take on a very important role when you realize this is the only time when readers have ever heard about Aristotle or the origins of Aryan civ. not 100 years ago, every University graduate was expected to know Greek and Latin and Nicomanchian Ethics was universally required reading the same way Kangz Literature like To Kill A Mockingbird is today. one of the most destructive ways the kike has subverted our identity is by poisoning our education and dilluting our traditions. so threads like this serve the critical role of educating the zoomers by keeping the torch of our past burning.

Attached: wellh-russ-u-make-memes-because-people-have-the-attention-37456304.png (500x557, 152.4K)

good post, today OP was not a faggot

Women are tools. Not people. Never were people. Never will be people.
Your pussy worship won't change that, numale soyboy.

You can't know eternity without knowing only you conceive of eternity, and niggers can't.

So many flavours
Yet you chose bitter

Not an ounce of guilt here.

Good thread
Bump for discussion

The great majority of (white) racemixers are females. They are also the ones most susceptible to kike propaganda due to lack of reasoning capacity. Jews are the logical conclusion of the feminine principle. The vaginal Jew fears Apollo.

Stop trying to turn our struggle into a gender issue you kike tranny, maybe you should edit yourself to become genderless like the rest of you transhumanist trash, or even better, edit your life function to zero.

National Socialism on homosexuality
Heinrich Himmler
Speech to the SS Group Leaders
(18 February 1937)

A hundred and fifty years ago someone at a Catholic university wrote a doctoral thesis with the title: "Does a woman have a soul?" From this the whole tendency of Christianity emerges: it is directed at the absolute destruction of women and at emphasizing the inferiority of women. The entire substance of the priesthood and of the whole of Christianity is, I am firmly convinced, an erotic union of men (Männerbund) for the erection and maintenance of this 2000-year old Bolshevism. I reach that conclusion because I know very well the history of Christianity in Rome. I am of the conviction that the Roman emperors, who eradicated (ausrotteten) the first Christians, did exactly the same thing that we are doing with the communists. These Christians were then the worst yeast which the great city contained, the worst Jewish people, the worst Bolsheviks that there were.

It relies on Paul and the very first apostles who derogate the woman as something sinful and permit or recommend marriage as merely a legal way out of prostitution - that is in the Bible - and derogate the procreation of children as a necessary evil. This priesthood continues along in this way for several centuries until in 1139 the celibacy of priests is fully implemented.

I assume that in the monasteries the homosexuality ranges from 90 or 95 to 100 percent.

The German woman, not the man, has borne the greater sacrifice of blood in the witch and heretic trials.

Attached: 2.png (478x5318 2.8 MB, 2.73M)

Christians dissed women due to them being "dirty" (which is not far from the truth), I am just stating that they are a biologically inferior gender, which is proven in practice over and over again. Their only values are beauty and reproductive capacity. Modern matriarchal societies are the most kiked ones. The best way to destroy a movement is to get a woman to lead it, which is exactly what you kikes are trying to do here.

Let's go to a street of any western country (eastern ones are getting the poz as well so they would work out too), take a pen and paper, and count interracial couples (with one coupling being white). You know, empirical, scientific observation. What will the gender ratio be? In my case, it's 90% women. But let's expand the sample so we can get good results.

how is it possible to be morally excellent when getting involved in shitposting? is there even such a thing as a bright shitpost.

I think often about the theory of internet posting. and how to make communications fast, deep and cryptic.

I'm going to post this here because it's a thread about new vocabulary. It's still kind of off topic but I don't think it requires much discussion. My gf found this incredible word while reading The Return of the King. Aragorn says something like "You are a good man and not niggardly, Faramir." What a fantastic word. Anyway bumping this good thread.

Attached: Screenshot_2019-02-18-11-41-43.png (720x1280, 165.12K)

shitposting is primal and has potential to get down to the roots

That word invokes powerful fa/tg/guy feels
Nephandi a shit
The Marauders did nothing wrong

Attached: Mage-2nd-cover.jpg (216x277, 8.01K)