Put religion and socio-economic issues to the side here. What part of this trinity is the best path? Each one draws upon ancient beliefs about sacred geometry, consciousness, and the nature of existence.

Merkaba (revelation/realization/moral)
Kabbalah (explanation/reference/material)
Masonry (Achillean [or sapphism]/material and moral)

The ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle pointed out the problem with common resources: "What is common to many is taken least care of, for all men have greater regard for what is their own than for what they possess in common with others." Aristotle (384-322 BC), a Greek philosopher and scientist, taught Alexander the Great (356-323 BC). He tutored Alexander the Great from c.342-c.339 BC.

excerpt: "...is there a real turn towards the classical past as a source of insight, as a new phenomenon – and, if so, how far does this reflect a crisis of Enlightenment analysis and values, such that they are no longer felt to be adequate?"
from: https://thesphinxblog.com/2016/12/15/achilles-as-philosopher/

>well since I'll be the only one in the thread
Adjusting my POV - the work the writer oftentimes requires of the readership - is rarely made intelligible or clear going through philosophy works. For example, the author states he/she is going to do a complete dissection of such and such - let's say a frog idk. - and about midway, or some other irrelevant moment, starts expounding how great the frog tastes going on and on and making an entirely new chapter blurred into the current one. That's just one example. I can understand 'where' I am supposed to sit reading Ficht's views - it doesn't demand focus and refocus unnecessarily. Same with Socrates (imho when Plato was his best), Aristotle and others that understood the audience (see OP again). I can't into Kant, not going to try Nietzsche, might try Hegel. But why do I need to read a completely different author/philosopher to explain that another one was f'n retarded? Too many out of the few blur the guidelines and just make me want to throw the book at a fucktard.

>>24526746
>put it into scope

The OP post posits the trinity of the three basic in-the-dirt foundations when: discourse, dialogues, and experimentation between parties; has been stripped away to its bones.

>also this : >The Truth Of Thought, Or, Material Logic: A Short Treatise On The Initial Philosophy, The Groundwork Necessary For The Consistent Pursuit Of Knowledge
by Poland, William, 1848-1923
https://archive.org/details/TheTruthOfThought/mode/2up
>Could not find this in translated English
>Correspondencia. Kant, Fichte, Schelling, Hegel
by Immanuel Kant; Johann Gottlieb Fichte; Friedrich Schelling; Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel
Publication date 2011
https://archive.org/details/correspondencia.-kant-fichte-schelling-hegel-immanuel-kant-johann-gottlieb-ficht/mode/2up

>checkem
>pathos ethos logos kairos eros
I'm cornered, tired, and hungry. Keep going /lit/.