Archived threads in /lit/ - Literature - 640. page

Not a native english speaker here, how hard is it to read Gravity's Rainbow in english?

>>9759789
difficult only in the most superficial ways: references, complexity of plot, and willingful obscurity, completely unrelated to depth of artistry

>>9759783
>Would people still think he was such a good writer if
Yes

File: smith.jpg (7KB, 251x201px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 251x201px

>>9759578
keep at it, little buddy.

post extract or other work

>>9759578
Most authors are rejected a fuck load of times. This is part of the job.

>>9759255

1: does the author believe in God?

2: yes? into the trash it goes.

there.

>>9759255
Wayne Grudem's book is great.

I have heard great things about Robert L Reymonds "A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith". Check out John Frame's book as well.

>>9759495
Are atheists literally this stupid?

The early bird catches the worm

To have loads of sex

File: cool stirner.jpg (11KB, 240x240px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 240x240px

Just be yourself

>>9759191
One is based in phenomenology one is based in logic.

Continental philosophy
>Kant: We cannot account for our experience of things by reference either to the things themselves, or by assuming that "mind" is some kind of magic substance that simply "knows" things with certainty. Instead, we can study the conditions of our experience of things, and the necessary conditions of that experience, such as certain structuring laws, categories of thought, and the fact that there must be a unified subject to know, qua knowing, what (and that) it is knowing.

>Hegel: I agree, but now you've gotten us trapped being finite, atomistic subjects, and your account of ethical life is all screwy as a result. The understanding and self-understanding of subjects, at any given time, is collective, historical, and rationally developmental and progressive.

>Nietzsche & Kierkegaard: We agree with the collective constitution bit, but also with Kant, in that we're finite as fuck. It's more about the attitude you take toward experience and its possibilities, than some final rational grounding, which is itself questionable and merely contingent.

>Neo-Kantians: What if humans are made of a special sauce that isn't reducible to physical laws?

>Husserl: I agree with Kant. Let's do the Kant thing again, but much better.

>Heidegger: No, I agree with Nietzsche and kinda with Kierkegaard. Artistic living, in a self-aware mode about how you're made of special sauce, is the answer. Not self-conscious, philosophical, progressive rationality.

>Foucault: Yeah, I agree with Nietzsche too.

>Derrida: Yeah I think Nietzsche had it.

>Deleuze: I agree, Nietzsche mostly got it right.

>Marxists: Hegel had it sort of right, except fuck capitalism. Wait, no, Nietzsche had it right, and fuck capitalism!

>William James: What if the sauce we're made of us SO special that you can't reduce us to mechanical laws at all? What if everything about consciousness is important? Even mystically, maybe? I don't like the idea of forcing complex things to fit reductive, mechanical explanations.

>Bergson: Sounds good. You can hang out with us.

>Ricoeur: Seems like we're all at least agreed that a subject can be trapped in a world it never made, and that one's desires, paradoxically, can be desires one would not have chosen for oneself.

>Structuralists: That's pretty much how it works.

>Lacan: Yeah, something like that. You now owe me five-hundred francs. And I need someone to drive me home.

>>9759355
Analytic philosophy
>Mill (and Comte): What if humans AREN'T made of special sauce, but are actually lots of little mechanisms, and we can understand them as easily as any other physical mechanism?

>Different Neo-Kantians: What if we regularized the process of transcendental judgment?

>Frege: What if we regularized the process of making judgments? Wait, what does "transcendental" mean?

>Russell: Who cares what it means? This Hegel guy fucking sucks. Let's never talk about "transcendental" shit ever again. I like math better. It just werks!

>Vienna Circle: What if math just werked SO GOOD, that we never had to read confusing shit like Hegel ever again?

>Logical positivists and scientific empiricists and critical realists: Sounds good.

>Non-James pragmatists: I agree, sounds good.

>Collingwood: Oh god, oh god, I missed the last boat to the continent! Someone get me out of here, please! I can't take this shit!

>Wittgenstein: You think you have it bad? They keep dragging me to colloquia.

>Social scientists: Look, you can use covering-law models to explain these machines they used to call "people."

>Liberal ethicists: That seems okay to me. Just make sure to feed your "people" lots of slop, or it's unethical.

>Psychologists and cognitive scientists: Can we reprogram their brains to make them love cheaper slop? It will save money.

>Liberal ethicists: I don't see why not.

>Post-positivist philosophers of science: Wait, wait. Covering-law models, and scientific apparatuses in general, presuppose certain epistemological commitments. What if, like, what we don't know is actually true, but we can't know it, because we don't know it? What if to know something we don't know, we need to be open to the fact that our own criteria for judgment are--

>Logical positivists and scientific empiricists: BURN THEM AT THE STAKE!

>Quine: Uh, actually, they might be right.

>Sellars: Yeah, fuck, they might be right. Maybe we should read some continental philosophy?

>Kripke, Davidson, et al.: No, I don't care. Let's keep it in-house. I happen to like my sterile abstractions.

>Rorty: Guys, I snuck into the continentals' place, and we really fucked up. Nietzsche was right about pretty much everything.

>Analytic philosophy graduate students in 2017: Uh, excuse me, but "analytic" and "continental" are actually very simplistic terms! There is no such thing as an analytic or a continental. I'll have you know that my friend is doing very interesting pre-critical analytic metaphysics using Boolean trolley problems.

Sure. I'll post some sonnets I wrote for my girlfriend

Uneased by dark and dismal dawn's, I reach
afar and feel a lonly void each side-
And with a careless grasp i Cease the screech
A Coldness washing over like a tide.

The void, it grows a haunting bitter feel.
Familiar with the scathing burn by now
I give myself a stirring morning speal-
And fight the early freezing chill somehow

The morning fades and brightens just as prompt.
For weeks the golden muse of mine had left,
But within murky depths of love I'm swamped.
For her Returning soon I cease bereft.

And with a golden head of hair at rest.
Departing once again, I shall protest.

Excuse the spelling and grammar mistakes. Need to fix them up. But you get the jist

The master plays and gentle pulls at strings
A humble man i sway at masters whim
To left and right and up and down it brings
Me gently with Until the falling scrim

A thoughtful touch is all masters makes
And with the touch commands a guiding sway
At ease I lay consumed, I never ache
He guides me well, i never Dis obey

The master hides behind a darkened veil
In time I learnt the truth behind the strings
Is love that guides, Abstract but never stale
Embracing love and Everything it brings

For love to guide, it reaks of beauty pure
And love to live by, prompt I shall adjure

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytFAVUlRIp8

kek

>>9758863
Pls. stop. We already had a thread on that fat neckbeard a few days ago.

>>9758871

>Fowst by Gowth

jesus christ

Spread your thighs apart right now. Place your hand on your stomach and gently lift your shirt. Turn your hand over, and, starting at your belly button, run the tips of your fingernails gently down your abdomen. Slide your fingers under the waistband of your underpants. Keep going. Keep going. Do you feel a penis? If you do, take your hand out of your pants and go read some Ernst Mach. Burn any Murakami books in your residence. But if you feel nothing, then keep going. Fiddle with your pussy lips all day long. Crack open a nearby Murakami book (any will do - they're all the same) and finger yourself until you are raw and can't take it anymore. Read every word Murakami has ever written. Finger your gash until time itself comes to an end. You'll never accomplish anything. But at least you won't be bothering anyone.

>>9758445
the garbage

>>9758445
Literally any of his books because the large majority of them follow the same formula.

Because he's relatively mainstream and 4chan as a whole has a disdain for things in their niche reaching the mainstream.

File: 1499366942398.gif (2MB, 265x257px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 265x257px

He's a pseudo-intellectual hack

He makes out like he's some "I'm smarter than you" intellectual, but the reality is that he's a low IQ pleb who can't even handle actors blowing him the fuck out on live TV.

Rogan rule: Never seriously listen to any """intellectual""", or take any advice from anyone who has ever appeared on the Joe Rogan podcast

I only like pop culture representatives of science or philosophy if they are humble and do not step beyond their knowledge without admitting it. I dislike degrasse, nye, dawkins, nietzsche, and kaku for the same reasons.

>>9758321
Wasn't autism. He was just being thorough.

>>9758327
XD

>>9758321
>it's another is X author autistic? thread

first for space muslims

TUON IS EURASIAN

Third for Turtledove

>>9757780

An Anon posted an excerpt of it once and it was Finnegans Wake gibberish. I don't want to deal with that shit.

>>9757780
Because continental philosophy is dumb and only gets dumber with each passing decade. You start with a master like Husserl and you end up with inchoate "Dark Enlightenment" garbaje. Anything interesting the continental tradition had to say ended with Heidegger. Put it to bed already

>>9757780
>60 bucks for the rambling of a lsd faggot living in china
nah

File: 1500032245893.jpg (667KB, 2445x1392px) Image search: [Google]

667KB, 2445x1392px

I don't even feel like reading anything, I feel too stupid. Everything that a retard can't achieve requires some level of intelligence, and everything else is menial and pointless. On one hand, you have the world of climbing proverbial walls, on the other hand you have crushing emptiness and labor. All the while, I'm nothing but a creepy awkward loser. My negativity seems to always drive people away, except for people who are just as toxic as myself. It's like this balancing act, between being an awkward, bitter, socially rejected loser; and on the other hand maintaining some sort of image that seems acceptable in other people's eyes. On every front, there's something that requires you to climb a proverbial wall, because you can't just be a retard if you want to achieve anything in life.

Perhaps if I was mentally retarded, people would have more sympathy, because some people who don't care about the smell see that a retard is utterly inoffensive. But I am worse than a retard. I forget who it was that said the more intelligent someone is, the less successful they are as a species. So what does that make me? I realize that some people who seem to just be empty headed, vacuous hoes seem to coast by in life, without any sort of notion of what it means to be conscious of their own thoughts. Then there's me. All I have to do is think, and I've already committed the cardinal sin of exercising my thoughts; my naturally inferior thoughts which are by nature, lower on the dominance hierarchy. I am set up to fail by nature, if it was easy for me as it is for some people, who are by nature superior, then I would have never had to deal with these struggles.

I feel like I have so much potential to do great things, but I think the reality is I am a delusional, complacent person who is lazy. I expect everything to fall into my lap without any hard work.

like a flagert wallowander perching on a penny post kissing towards the tender sky, all the while the live long day reaches out to contort its hot bod. The sun shines in the shade standing there installing the cherry tree, sweat dripping from his brow; thinking of the moon light on the sweet summer terrace and the scintillation of a brief glance at her negligee, getting in to the mind of a tree chopper, or what is not worth it for some warm cherry pie

>>9757638
It's definitely inspiring, thought-provoking stuff. Enneads, sure. With a good introduction.

>>9757638
You should have a strong grasp on the dialogues of Plato before tackling Neoplatonism, as the latter is entirely dependent on the groundwork laid by the former. The Enneads in particular assumes a strong familiarity with Plato, as they were originally the personal scribblings of Plotinus later compiled and arranged systematically by his student Porphyry.

File: asdfffa.png (989KB, 1830x933px) Image search: [Google]

989KB, 1830x933px

This is a post I've saved from a month ago. I hope it helps.

quality thread

File: 1424810342432.gif (1001KB, 440x300px) Image search: [Google]

1001KB, 440x300px

Penetrating and prescient post, OP. We thank thee.

"Let me explain why I understand faggots and you do not."

--Every OP in this thread