What the fuck was his problem (regarding jazz)?
http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/SWA/On_popular_music_1.shtml
Is it really that hard to read?
>>9316513
patrician taste isnt a problem
"Jazz is pig shit for bourgeois who think they're cool. God I hate them so much"
- Theodor "Frankenstein" Adorno
In what order do I read nietzche's books?
Thus Spoke Zarathustra, chronological, and end once again with Thus Spoke Zarathustra
You start with none and leave it at that.
>>9316478
Alright, thanks anon
So, what is the purpose of writers? They reach a pretty small audience today (even shitty potboilers aren't super influential) and for most of history literature has been exclusive to the affluent and literate upper class.
So, why are writers just as or more important than religious leaders, actors, and politicians?
>t. someone who shitposts from their cubicle
>>9316459
their not but its a pretty big assumption that influence is the reason to write.
>religious leaders
master manipulators and literal narcissists
>actors
their talent is sometimes admirable but the way they become hotshots isn't
>politicians
basically a combination of the above
ITT: The darkest books you've ever read
Heart of Darkness
Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark
Fifty Shades of Black
So, are the presence of the law of entropy and the conservation of mass/energy proof that the gnostics were right and that our universe was made wrong?
>new matter and energy cannot be created, they can only decay into forms of energy that are physically impossible to utilize
>because usable energy is needed to perpetuate life and is converted to unusable energy in the process, living creatures must continually compete for resources to survive
>because of competition for resources, life has evolved to parasitically consume other life to survive
>humans kill other life to eat, we developed greed, paranoia, hatred, pain and misery all because it helped us as a species gather, protect and conserve the meager and decreasing resources available to us
How would a universe with no entropy work, Parmenides?
No.
Bye.
was he the original shitposter?
HOLY
>>9316333
ROMAN
Aristophanes.
Why is this so good?
Why don't you tell us?
huh, i knew lydia davis wanted to translate the title of swann's way like that but that penguin denied her. i didnt know the uk branch of penguin acquiesced.
>>9316308
It only gets better..
>tfw your bookshelf is full of books and can't fit your anime figurines anymore.
>>9316252
I only have two, I put them next to my screen on my shelf
>>9316252
>tfw your mental bookshelf is full of books and can't fit anymore knowledge in there anymore
>tfw separate shelves for anime figs and books.
Don't all religious people — regardless of religion: from the ancient polytheists to the modern monotheists — believe that they will be reunited with their loved ones "after death" somewhere? But that's also precisely what the Eternal Recurrence says — with the little caveat that we'll also be reunited with all those people that we hate, of course, or just generally dislike: which is precisely what the atheists believe, in their own way, when they say that we don't have to look far for heaven and hell, since they are both right here, right now.
See how everyone ultimately agrees on everything, if you know how to interpret what they say correctly? Which is to say, if your grasp of semiotics and psychology is so complete that you can jump between worldviews almost as easily as a translator does between the languages that he knows. And while language translation is possible because all languages ultimately express the same things: mankind's feelings; worldview translation is possible because all worldviews express the same thing too: the world, which all of us, of course, inhabit.
>See how everyone ultimately agrees on everything, if you know how to interpret what they say correctly?
>I understand nothing, so everything looks the same
>>9316163
>it's a dumb anon misreads Nietzsche episode AGAIN
this is some robust bait
Hello /lit/, so I want to start studying psychology
What are your recommendations for a good foundation?
It depends what you mean by psychology. Do you mean modern psychology as it's practiced, or are you philosophically interested in any discourse on how the mind works?
If it's the latter, maybe the best thing you can do would be to get an historical appreciation of the field's origins in the late 19th century and its development in the 20th. That would include psychoanalysis, too.
I study philosophy of mind, and I find psychology really interesting because it was institutionalised and turned into a discipline (into several disciplines really) so abruptly, after such a chaotic and relatively brief period of gestation. The institutional side couldn't "see" the flexibility and chaos of the more rarefied layers, so it basically just shaved them all off, and continues to do that whenever some guy like Jean Piaget comes along with philosophical background. Even psychoanalysis does that.
Because caring for human minds is in demand (economically), it tends to produce armies of people who can implement the protocols written in some book but who have no understanding and no capacity for understanding other ways of seeing things. It produces regional ontologies whose ontical structures are very rigid.
>>9316197
I´m interested in social psychology, how people interact, how they fetishes affect their personality and the meaning behind their fetish, how the interaction with other people affects permanently their personality and how this affects how they interact with society.
That kind of stuff.
psychology is a pseudoscience created by the frankfurt school to pacify the white men of western Christendom and spread cultural marxism
>The disputes that one has with •men who are stubbornly obstinate in their principles are the most tiresome of all; except perhaps for the disputes with •perfectly insincere people who don’t really believe the opinions they defend,
but engage in the controversy because they enjoy it or because they want to show how much cleverer and more ingenious they are than the rest of mankind
did Hume BTFO you guys centuries before you were born?
wow what a good thread.
>>9316089
I finally moved on from that mantra a while ago, anon.
Why did he write all that?
Why didn't he just write
>mfw arguing with stubborn people
>mfw arguing with "provocateurs"
I'm interested in horrorist philosophy. I've been reading several of Nick Land's blogposts (especially from his 'abstract horror' series) and will soon check out pic related and Negarestani's Cyclonopedia. Any other materials in a similar vein?
no
i fucking hate this site
i think land, thacker, and negarman are fine but holy shit horror fans are awful
>>9316026
It's just a tentative categorization. We can agree to call it something else if you have any contributions to make.
Cyclonopedia is good, very good in fact, for what's worth I'd recommend Fisher's The Weird and the Eerie
Which literature helps me to rescue my father from the belly of the whale?
Jung's works on alchemy
This one should have everything you need.
Moby's Dick
Who else is terrified of writing? I've received a lot of helpful feedback pitching my ideas to friends, family, teachers, coworkers, but it's so hard for me to write consistently. Am I just afraid of failing?
Why even bother posting? Do you really expect to find a epiphinic answer here? Suppose a wise old sage was lurking the boards, for just this day, and happened upon this pathetic thread, bestowing his universal wisdom, would you even listen? I doubt you would, you sackless fiend. You'd avert your eyes and pretend you didn't see it, just to affirm your own wretched cowardice.
>>9315966
Realistically you're lazy, but there might be a fear of failure broiling up in those gruts as well.
>>9315997
>would you even listen? I doubt you would, you sackless fiend.
That's untrue. A lot of people aren't complete stuck, they just need that last push - to 'hear it from someone else'. OP could very well be one of those people.
So after a few months of reading this while on the shitter, I'm close to finishing it. I'm reading the Fagles translation and I've gotta say that although it's been pretty enjoyable at times, I've not really been "grabbed" by it and I've never felt compelled to keep my ass planted to the toilet seat and risk getting haemorrhoids just to get to the next chapter.
This leads me to a broad question. I get that many people start with the Greeks, read classic texts and all that hooey just for the sake of 'completionism' and historical context: e.g. "at last I have read the Greeks, maybe now I will have street creed" or "a ha! so that's where those references came from!", but which of the classic texts remain legitimately enjoyable outside of their important historical context?
All of them desu, but you'll probably like Aristophanes.
>>9315930
who dat nigga?
I hope you have a horrible life and your mother gets cancer.