How did America go from having a plethora of great writers in the 19th and 20th centuries to a total dearth of them in the 21st century? What the fug.
>>9301549
They went from having no great writers, to having DJ Khaled.
william gass is still alive
>>9301549
you pretty much answered yourself by posting that picture
Why does nobody acknowledge that there are infinitely many possible philosophical axioms and infinitely many criteria for the judgement of these axioms?
It seems like once you realise this, all philosophical discussions become either laughable speculations about what the "true" definitions of concepts are (when these concepts are obviously arbitrarily defined); or, flailing about within the infinitely large space of unfalsifiable* conjectures. And the judgement of these speculations and conjectures is pretty much based on marketing.
I have never seen a worthwhile response to this. Can someone please give me an explanation?
* I mean we can't currently, at this moment, verify these things (e.g., We go to heaven after we die", "Once computers become fast enough, they will gain a consciousness"). And I know that science is merely a subset of philosophy. And I know there isn't an agreed upon scientific method. And i know there isn't an agreed upon definition of verify.
>>9301538
I've often thought this. I hate it when people talk about something being the 'logical choice' when making a decision about their life. I would ban the word logic outside of maths classrooms
>all philosophical discussions become either laughable speculations about what the "true" definitions of concepts are (when these concepts are obviously arbitrarily defined)
No they don't and no they aren't. Don't misuse the term 'arbitrary'
>>9301538
>Why does nobody acknowledge that there are infinitely many possible philosophical axioms and infinitely many criteria for the judgement of these axioms?
They do, which is modern philosophy is a joke designed to get PhDs tenure teaching their autistic theories
adam phillips one is fire
Pull a fire alarm.
hemingway
faulkner
murakami
>>9301476
faulkner one is legendary. harold bloom's could be better
>walk into B&N
>Hidden Figures book has a huge display when you first walk in
>grab a copy and walk to the fiction section, flipping through the first few pages in disgust
>first fucking sentence has some we wuz space n shiet bullshit
>there's a fucking semi colon in like the first sentence, incorrectly used, beyond pretentious
>I open the middle page, spit my gum out into it, slam the book shut
>walk to the front Hidden figures display with all these normies oogling at it
>put gum-stuck copy on top of display so it's the first one someone would grab
>>9301405
>not putting it in the fiction section you were just in
What the fuck you idiot
>>9301416
I want someone to buy it filled with gum. I don't chew tobacco but spitting that shit into the book would've been better
>>9301405
WE WUZ SPACE NIGGERS
Can /lit/ recommend me some books on conformity?
The Communist Manifesto
>>9301347
This
Start with the Greeks
Help, it seems completely arbitrary to me what Kant makes up to be a priori in Pure Reason and Prolegomena.
>>9301196
hhhhelp
>>9301196
he describes it pretty clearly in the introduction to both. But a priori means a proposition that isn't grounded in experience while a priori propositions are. Analytic a priori propositions are propositions whose concepts are contained within its subject like tricycles have three wheels. Synthetic a priori propositions are the focus of the cpr because they are what can limit pure reason, or what we can know by pure reason alone without referring to experience. You'll notice though that a proof that Kant uses for the possibility of synthetic a priori truths (which HUme was denying the possibility of) are arithmetic proposition such as 7+5 = 12. kant claims this is synthetic because nothing in the concept of 7+5 will lead you to twelve and so one must refer to their intuition to come to 12 which is supposedly a proof that we can extend concepts without experience.
Have you read Leibniz?
Can you define irony as it is typically used today?
Personally I think the quickest way to describe it is simply with this image
im willing to personally find the person who made this image and pay them a hefty sum of money if they promise to
a.) never make an image like this one again
b.) never touch a computer ever again
desu
shit
Name a more iconic duo.
I'll wait.
Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky
Batman and Robin.
Bush and Cheney
>cycle through motifs
>throw in an allusion here and there
>completely stop trying to develop characters/ plot
>acclaimed as one of the greatest modernist writers
>pretentious """"scholars"""" will tell you you just dont get it
???
grr this posy makes me soo mad let's dox this peace of sh*t bros...
>>9301039
Personal armyposter
Who are you quoting?
Any books by Zizek worth a read?
None of his books are worth to read. But he will remain popular anyway - whatever I say.
He is a likeable and funny man I'll give him that.
Kuga fantazem
>>9301034
Have you even read any of them?
What was his endgame?
Why doesnt he have any eyebrows?
Don't mind me, just posting goodHegel instead of badHegel (Hegel).
Absolute was his end game. Or being flipped over by Marx. One of those.
why is /lit/ so entry level?
The requirement for posting is being able to click all the street signs
Speaking of entry-level, what are some good entry-level books/essay about art?
>>9301000
>he doesn't use legacy
PLEBIAN
L
E
B
I
A
N
Post a song, and others will recommend a book based on how it sounds.
I'll start: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULQmyIH0eAM
ayyyy a Staalplaat brother. My favorite label.
I'd say this reminds me a bit of Samuel Beckett's "Not I" or maybe "Footfalls".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9gAm3aDQ3s
>>9300999
Bright lights big city, by Jay McInerney
Okay, once and for all, what the FUCK was his problem?
>>9300931
I think...
he might have just kept writing and then realized he made something.
Just a theory.
wait so /lit/ doesn't like catcher in the rye? why not
Okay, once and for all, what the FUCK was his problem?
>mfw unironically writing the most important philosophical work of the 21st century
how do I go through the whole process of sorting my publishing, editing etc. and making sure it gets published even if i die by accident?
>>9300859
>unironically writing the most important philosophical work of the 21st century
no you're not
>>9300859
t. rupi kaur
>>9300879
Yes, I am, seriously. I'm 10,000 words in and intend to complete it by summer. It's going to blow a hole in the WORLD, WIDe, WeB.