Archived threads in /lit/ - Literature - 1009. page

>>9582039
God tier prose

>>9582039
i read

>overhanging flaps

and thought of something very different

>>9583382
yeah my nutsack currently in your mouth
how does it taste huh?

Reading "The Royal Family" at the moment. The guy sure knows how to write but it feels (at least as far as I am reading) scattershot as fuck. It feels like he has just put in paper everysingle great combination of words (great combinations, anyway) that he could think of. I have a similar sensation while reading Gass, it seems like these people just want to be genius and are trying as hard as they can to be. I like (again, so far) Vollmann style better, he seems like a very passionate writer, someone who truly loves this. He's interesting, to say the least.

>>9581553
Really accurate

Good prose stylist, uninteresting overall

DFW is superior

>>9581054
I liked them

>>9581054
They're really shit, especially the sequels

>>9581054
I didn't like them

yo try hard boiled wonderland. reading it now and it goes heavy in the surrealism dept. 1Q84 is pretty decent if you really like to buried in that feeling. it is pretty repetitive and slow though, for murakami.

wind up bird if you don't care about following the plot like at all

>>9580761
Thanks, definitely going to check those out. I actually loved the emotional depth in Norwegian Wood, is there any other novel quite like it or it's just parallel worlds and/or cat chasing?

Ascend to patrician status and read Killing Commendatore like me.

just pick one it doesn't matter

>>9580664
Oh no, you don't want to do that. We don't know what could happen.

i'd rather understand the progression of nabokov's style as opposed to jumping from pale fire back to the defense

File: 1495940234601.jpg (15KB, 318x405px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 318x405px

>>9580571

>Person of Interest starter pack?
>How redpilled are these?

This board gets more Reddit every day.

Thanks, T_D.

>>9581400
>providing nothing to the thread
Thanks reddit

>>9580571
People actually watch this show? I thought it was just something a broadcast network created to pad out their in-flight entertainment deals

>>9580378
I'll preface this by admitting I haven't read Spinoza yet, but from the (i creasingly frequent) mentions of him in my readings of plato/aristotle/general philosophy, and from peeking at the Ethics a few times, what I've gathered or at the very least guessed is:

The ethics use the vocabulary and likely the corresponding concepts of aristotelian metaphysics. I do not know how anyone could understand the ethics without first reading aristotle's physics (and probably metaphysics, but I can't say for sure as I havenm'y read that). I would also guess that the Ethics leans on aquinas' summa, since aquinas also heavily drew on Aristotle and (I've been led to believe) heavily inflemce spinoza. Also aristotle's physics/metaphysics build on the organon, so you could go pretty far back if you really wanted to..

Besides that all I really remember is that Spinoza's formal structure is in the tradition of euclid, so you may want to check him out too.

Sorry for any typos, I'm on my phone and mid workout.

>>9580378
Descartes Meditations (essential, a thorough reading must be done of this first or you'll be wasting your time)

Euclid's Elements (general understanding of the method)

Highly recommend Curley, Bennett, Hegel, and Deleuze as supplementary material (though stay away from the latter for awhile...muh expressionism is quite the leap)

Aristotle's okay to know but really the rationalists were anti Aristotilean and should be taken seriously on their claims to build a new philosophy from the ground up. But i cannot reiterate how essential Descartes is for understanding Spinoza.

>>9580695
>I haven't read Spinoza yet
Stopped reading there.

t. Jaden Smith

File: 1494461310066.png (1MB, 971x3800px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 971x3800px

>>9580341

>>9580286

source?

Das Kapital

>>9580160
Really? should I go ask on /his?

>>9580123
So you don't actually care about learning political science?

>>9579992
Shitposting while watching netflix isn't some automatic end of all hope situation. You have many more years ahead of you to change course. Don't give up hope.

>>9579992
If you can't even summon the willpower to read a book I doubt you're going to be able to kill yourself. And if you do why didn't you just dedicate that energy to reading a book instead?

>>9579992
You're depressed. Go to a few sessions with your university's counselor.

McDuff or P&V.

>>9579973

Please, i don't want Russian to French and French to English.

Romantic languages tend to be less direct, so i feel a lot of the existentialist insights in the original book will be heavily modified.

File: vladimirka-by-isaac-levitan-1892.jpg (237KB, 1412x902px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 1412x902px

>>9579979
P&V definitely.

I was reading Constance Garnett's translations of Crime and Punishement and it was a slog, couldn't finish it. I read the P&V Translation in 5 days.

she got my baby batter launched up her colon

>>9579901
The Canadian government makes people read her in high school.

>>9579934
Yeah, because muh feminism and muh canadian references - you want real literature? Read Alice Munro's short stories. A real talent.

>>9579890
Nietzsche. Maybe some tid-bits of Descartes before that, but directly straight to Nietzsche afterwards

the post-greek greeks

File: resumeWithRomans.jpg (3MB, 6100x3721px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 6100x3721px

>>9579904
Nietzsche is great insofar as his thought develops from the Greeks in a way others do not. Nietzsche, however, also draws on the Romans.

>>9579890
Resume with the Romans
Also, the NeoPlatonists would also be good.

>>9579677
>'normies'
>frog
>'memes'

Kill yourself

>teacher ask students to read 713 pages in 2 days for an exam.
In what fantasy world do you live

>>9579677
This is sad, what do you hope to gain by lying to us like this?

>>9579404
>reading continentals

try the redpill that deals with facts not feels

>>9579404

>And geometry is pure intuition because it is discernible without the senses, right?

You need prior knowledge to fit a cube into a square whole. In order to get prior knowledge, one must fit a square in another shape. If it doesn't fit perfectly, it is not a square.

You do need senses to determine whether or not geometry is useful to you.

>>9579404
Kant’s conception of the essentially non-conceptual character of geometrical
reasoning is thus especially sensitive to the circumstance that, in Euclid’s formulation of
geometry, the iterative application of initial constructive operations represents the
existential assumptions we would express by explicit quantificational statements in
modern formulations following Hilbert. Thus, for example, whereas Hilbert represents
the infinite divisibility of a line by an explicit quantificational axiom stating that between
any two points there exists a third, Euclid represents the same idea by showing how to
construct a bisection function for any given line segment (Proposition I.10): our ability
to iterate this construction indefinitely then represents the infinite divisibility of the same
segment. More generally, Euclid constructs all the points in his plane by the iterative
application of three initial constructive operations to any given pair of points: connecting
any two points by a straight line segment (Postulate 1), extending any given line segment
by another given line segment (Postulate 2), constructing a circle with any point as center
and any given line segment as radius (Postulate 3).