Critique – Modern Romanticism

Philosophy – “Why Criticism is not the same as Hatred” – 2/17/2021

“Unlike hatred, criticism is its opposite. Criticism constructs. It lifts, just the same as love.”
– Modern Romanticism

To reject criticism is to reject the friend. It is to reject the one who doesn’t find you perfect. Is not the essence of friendships to show vulnerability around the other? Is this not the same as trusting who you claim to be your friend?

It is fear that leads to division, not hatred. Hatred only comes out of the need to fill a void, where once was love.

As it is fear that leads to division, then we should comprehend that every emotion, so fleeting to ourselves, reveals our imperfection and insecurities enough to require friendship. As in, why do we yearn for ourselves to be divided, ever-more? “Division” is an open wound, a parting between people, so to speak. Our divisions are the wounds between us. Division is the gap between people. We bleed, only because we have no one to cry with.

Criticism will lift, because it knows a person’s flaws. Hatred, however, will seek to destroy. Genuine hate is never wide-spread. It is never so broad, as fear. Though, it could be appropriate to mention that should a person be able to love all others, then they can also fear for every one of those people. The division, through fear, would then come when people do not wish to become involved. Thus, there is the ignorance for which is a relation to fear.

It is a confusion, when people tend to misunderstand how they have become divided. It was never out of hate, as it was always due to fear. People are ignorant of those they do not know, due to them being fearful of truth.

If we ever hate, then we must have once known how to love. That is factual. It cannot be hatred that divides, because genuine hate is always born out of an understanding to someone. It was the betrayal that caused the part between two persons, though hatred bred itself out of knowledge for what a person never knew of who they once trusted and loved. That is, some side of the betrayer was revealed, and thus, hatred was born, filling the void where once was sheer love.

It is to criticism that knows weakness, though seeks to repair it. It is criticism, that between soulful friends, know each other’s strengths and weaknesses. The critical friend will simply point out those flaws, to next say to the troubled one that their strength is enough to mend them. This is to say that a critical friend will not do the work for their troubled companion, though will simply show them the path.

Quote – “The Differences of Criticism” – 9/19/2020

“As hatred cannot be offered by use of words, then it falls to criticism to undertake speech made through use of intellect or idiocy. For when the former takes place, being of intellect, then it is the debate that stages the ground. When it is the latter taking place, being that of idiocy, there is no intellect, and there is merely the insult being hurled.”
– Modern Romanticism

Essay #1: “The Destitution of Truth, formed from the Denial of God” – “The Absence of Love Inevitably Creates the Search for Truth”

“Science is not ever directly related to beauty, because just as life is protected, a machine is always changed and enhanced. The “beautiful” thing that is changed was at first, met with dissatisfaction. This has all been born out of a denial of love’s importance, because love shields beauty from it ever being changed.”

Through history, the denial of God has been apparent, for the purpose of discovery. Science has bred this love of exploration into the unknowns and has made the love permanent. Though, the denial of God will eventually breed the denial of love’s importance. It is so, because as things that support love and beauty are supporters of things not meant to change, we have science, which is a thing born of change. Development and discovery is the essence of constant change, and constant change doesn’t differ at all from the truth being molded and shaped to one’s liking. The denial of God forms the denial of love, because the denial of love would make science as the denial of things that do not change. The only reason why science opposes God is in the fact that God is said to never change. God is said to never change, because God is said to have created love. Love does not change, though what does destroy perhaps a marriage is dissatisfaction. In the matter of the denial of love, there is only truth to discover. And that is, the truth that becomes changed, constantly. Love is what supports truth, while hatred changes truth, because hatred is defined as dissatisfaction. A dislike into what has already been implemented will entice that hatred, and the protectors will protect while the destroyers will eliminate. Those who destroy what has not changed, inevitably destroy beauty. Those who protect what should not change, inevitably protect beauty. For beauty is defined as the thing that does not change, nor even become “obsolete” as some technology to the last three months. Science is not ever directly related to beauty, because just as life is protected, a machine is always changed and enhanced. The “beautiful” thing that is changed was at first, met with dissatisfaction. This has all been born out of a denial of love’s importance, because love shields beauty from it ever being changed.

After a denial of love from the denial of God, there is going to be the molding of truth. A transgender will not see the genitals as linked to their truth. It is because just as Adam and Eve had encountered their shame, from the same sight, they soon covered themselves with fig leaves at the approach of God; this makes the flesh as the truth to be covered by love. When the Transgenders will see their flesh, after a previous generation of abandoning modesty and the rise of Pornography, that truth becomes molded like their own flesh to be sculpted. For a human is only ever divided into three categories, and those categories are: love, truth, and death. Should truth be molded enough so that it shows its disorder so evidently, then death will be the next thing to experience.

…

A Critique on Feminism – “Smallness is Intelligence”

Q: What do you see what you stare upwards?

A: I see the epitome of success. I see those who have risen, and this height they have crawled to find, has made them topple over what was at that height. Like some bear that climbs a tree too light for its own weight, that tree will fall.

Q: Success is then defined as what?

A: It is something gained through intelligence.

Q: And what is slavery?

A: It is something that is divided between the mind and body. The body, being, what is sympathized, these days, leaving the mind vulnerable.

Q: And why is the mind vulnerable?

A: It is because the mind holds power when the physical size of the body is lacking. A woman in today’s time lacks intelligence, because she has focused much on her body.

Q: Why has she focused so much on her body?

A: That is because a woman will empathize with the wound, the physical wound, just as she did when women were nurses during the Great Wars. She can see the wound clearly, and feel empathy. This makes a woman the perfect nurse.

Q: And why has she neglected the mind?

A: It is because no one, neither a man nor a woman, can have two primary focuses. When the women of the past were protected for their bodies, it was men who did this; and now, their minds are enslaved, so much that they focus primarily on their bodies. However, as much as the mind has been neglected, it can only be neglected so much; and that is due to that “negligence” will reduce the secondary focus down to 1% to the primary focus of 99%. There is no such thing as a 50-50 “equal” focus, because no one, especially people of competition, are satisfied with a tie.