Archived threads in /lit/ - Literature - 252. page

>>9936846


Except the column on the right describes Science. The one on the left is more like Analytic Philosophy. The only criterion for the "pseudo" label is a conclusion inconsistent with current dogma. Take 50 "Scientific" papers and 50 "Pseudoscientific" ones, omit the conclusions and deny access to reviews and ask any number of experts to identify which are which based on methodology alone. No one will know. If anything, more "pseudo" papers will be seen as legit simply due to them not lazily taking previous data as "self-evident".

>Starts with a conclusion, then works backwards to confirm.
Basically describes the majority of Evolutionary Science to a T.

File: 51LVx6UrW5L._SX326_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (40KB, 328x499px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 328x499px

>>9936846
The epitome of 'Starts with a conclusion, then works backwards to confirm.'

I looked, anon, but could not find. Sounds oriental.

>>9936954

Thanks, think it may have been set in Australia

>>9936818
So the old man on the beach was actually the dog in the story?...

I think it depends on your ontology, for example with buddhist ontology (dependent origination) nothing really transcends anything else, whereas with say Kants system, the noumena transcends the noumenal

>Are "transcendence" and "everything" mutually incompatible terms?

Here I think this is a somewhat misuse of "transcendence", as in you're making it into an object or thing, whereas in normal talk we use the word as a way of talking about the relation between two things "the external worlds transcends my personal experience, or, x transcends y", rather than 'transcendence' being an actual thing itself to discuss.

What people fail to realize is that we have already transcended.
Consciousness is transcendence.

>>9936826

So if we define the Universe as everything, and say that something transcends the Universe. Does it still transcend the Universe, or is it in the same set as [everything = Universe], and we rename this new set as the Universe?

i feel like this exact thread was posted 3 times today

>>9936857

was it? I hardly see Burroughs discussed here

>>9936730
try reddit

>>9936697
Yes. It was disputed by Aquinas before him based on the principle of identity and unity and by Garrigou-Lagrange later on in more detail in God, His Existence and His Nature.

His proof follows perfectly from his definitions and axioms, so we can't dispute it. However we can say that his definitions and axioms are just words with only a vague meaning.

>>9937228
>However we can say that his definitions and axioms are just words with only a vague meaning

mind if i use that for a smuggie m8?

>>9936691
A lot more Borges stories do that.
O'Brien's The Third Policeman cites some works by De Selby, which is a non-existent philosopher (appearing as a character in his the Dalkey Archive)

>>9936691
Lovecraft's Cthulhu Mythos, specifically the Necronomicon.

>>9936677
Just be youreself, white man

>>9936677
Just use Goodreads you goddamned mong.

>>9936677
Why do you hate reading? I can't imagine doing something you don't enjoy just to pretend.

>raw enthusiasm of /tv/

???

enthusiasm for shitposting? for posting about cunnies?

/tv/ -- both the board and the forms of media it covers -- is dead.

>The entire medium is constipated by the need for everything to conform with academic bullshit
Give examples.

File: IMG_3462.png (2MB, 725x598px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 725x598px

>>9936640

Nothing

You're better off doing something with immediate gratification ie tv video games or slapping the salami

reading isn't fun

Unfortunately not much

Same boat. Reading is the last thing that will bring you much after a gruelling day at work

Weeks days I just get home. Lay in bed for a few hours shitposting and talking to friends online. Somedays I go lay in my girlfriends bed

>>9936590
you seem upset online

Escapism!
I'm a very creative and imaginative person so reading authors like J.K Rowling, wolfe and tolkien is far more immersive than any film or video game.

>>9936580
more density than movies and tv

The meditative nature of reading is, well, hard to top. You sit down, your eyes pass over shapes, you recognize those shapes as letters, you combine those letters into words, you chain those words to make coherent images and patterns in your head, and soon those images and patterns themselves link together and fully resonate within you.

But I suppose if we're going to pretend that apples and oranges can be compared, then it's just as well to say that the best pieces of literature do not have equivalents in TV/film/vidya/etc. (For instance: In Search of Lost Time in full, and Ulysses with any actual quality)

Your learning ;)

Post one

I went through this for a long time. Now I write stuff and journals still don't take it but I'm proud of it years later and it doesn't make me cringe. Did I make it?

File: l-etranger-51303.jpg (59KB, 298x500px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 298x500px

American books all look bulky even for relatively short books. They also have colorful covers. Here in France most covers are simple with Author, name of the book and a simple picture.

>>9936533
What's with that icky stuff in the bottom right?

>>9936537
The logo of Éditions Gallimard imprint/collection Folio.

Saints for Sinners (Goodier)
Saints for Now (Luce)

It is a collection of anecdotes and sayings, but the Apophthegmata Patrum

OP, you might enjoy reading about "fools for Christ" which is an Orthodox category of saints who act very eccentric or even crazy. Basil, one of the better known ones, went around chained and nude. The movie "Ostrov" is about one

>>9936581
And the novel Laurus that you see mentioned here talks a lot about that