We ask why David Myatt’s mystical philosophy of pathei-mathos is unappreciated and why old unproven allegations and rumours about him are still propagated today. We suggest it may be (i) because in Myatt’s philosophy empathy and personal honour lead us away from the Judeo-Christian illusion of causal abstractions (a naming) and a dialectic of opposites based on such naming with the inevitable apocalyptic eschatology; and (ii) because his philosophy presents a modern and rational paganism based on Greco-Roman values and is therefore seen by certain antifascists as belonging to a new and emerging and dangerous “right-wing” milieu in which ancestral (native and pagan) European culture and a tradition of personal honour are central.
While David Myatt’s post-2012 writings about extremism have (i) been prejudicially rejected by individuals of a particular political persuasion and (ii) ignored, or even prejudicially rejected, by academics who have mentioned him usually in the context of certain unproven allegations, a most interesting and neglected aspect those post-2012 writings concern war, Catholicism, and ‘good and evil’ in the context of Christianity, Islam, the modern State and his own pagan philosophy of pathei-mathos. Most interesting, for five reasons. First, because when studied without preconceptions they complement and extend his philosophy of pathei-mathos; second, because they are based on his personal experience of Christianity and Islam; thirdly because they reveal his scholarly knowledge of those subjects; fourthly, because the concept of the numinous is embedded in such writings, and fifthly because they not only compliment his writings about his personal rejection of extremism but elegantly refute the aforementioned prejudicial rejection of his post-2012 writings.
Between April and August of 2022 David Myatt – the inspiration for our Hebdomian Way and creator of The Star Game – gave three interviews each one of which was informative about his philosophy of pathei mathos, his life experiences, about extremism, and about his current views, and which together provide a fairly comprehensive understanding of not only Myatt himself but also of his philosophy, or weltanschauung as he prefers to call it.
In addition to these interviews, the June 2022 text Misunderstanding Denotata In Myatt’s Philosophy Of Pathei-Mathos is included for it provides an insightful overview of his philosophy and life, an insight evident in this quotation:
<quote> In the final paragraph of his autobiography Myngath he concludes that “a shared, a loyal, love between two people is the most beautiful, the most numinous, the most valuable thing of all.”
Such personal sentiments ground, and in my view express the essence of, his weltanschauung and have apparently been somewhat neglected in discussions of Myatt’s ‘philosophy’ of pathei-mathos. For it is not an academic philosophy divorced from the realities of human life but the life experience of someone who, learning from both diverse experiences and decades of scholarly study, has distilled that learning into the understanding that in order to presence the numinous we do not need religions or any -ism or -ology or abstractions but have only to behave in a certain cultured way: with manners, fairness, honour, humility, and compassion. </quote>
It’s interesting and certainly indicative that there has been no rational, detailed, analysis of David Myatt’s post-2012 writings in which writings he explains his rejection of extremism and his philosophy of pathei-mathos. Interesting and indicative because since 2014 his many political opponents have publicly, repeatedly, and prejudicially denounced his rejection of extremism as a deception; have called him a liar; have stated that he is not only still an extremist but also a neo-nazi. Thus, instead of making a judgement based on a knowledge of the facts acquired through analysis, they have prejudged the matter based on an existing hostility or bias. Considered here are some of Myatt’s writings about extremism, about his philosophy, and about his life, which his political opponents have failed to rationally analyse.