What are the substantive differences between virtue ethics and deontological ethics?
>>9069591
the level of virginity they appeal to in their adherents
>>9069600
fuck off back to /r9k/
Virtue ethics -> good intentions
Deontology -> good actions
Consequentialism -> good results
Will Zizek ever take LSD?
>>9069560
Can't wait until he join the redpill movement finally. He will be an important figure in our fight to get women back in the kitchen and saving the white race
>>9069560
Zhe uni*sniff*verse *sniff/tug* is like *sniff* wow dude.
*tugs shirt*
getting a college degree is such a joke like wow i won the approval of people who unironically like Jane Austen and Robert Frost. Does anybody actual enjoy like 'classics'? they're like the dad rock of literature. shit is so dated, boring and culturally irrelevant, seems about as helpful to an aspiring writer as studying alchemy would be to an aspiring chemist
>>9069385
Austen is very good, though. Frost too.
expecting to be a professional writer, regardless of what educational endeavours you pursue, is a silly idea.
Hahaha but what do you think my farts smell like?
Guess...go on, guess!
Is there any good muslim literature? I know some guys from Maghreb (Kateb Yacine, Mohammed Dib, Assia Djebar, Tahar Ben Jelloun, Boualem Sansal)
Are there any good novelists who do not praise Allach in every verse?
Or who do not cry over the french colonies?
No.
No.
No.
>>9069374
You sound like your mother when I tried to pick her up
>>9069377
Absolutely harem!!!
Books that feel like touching a monolith?
>>9069363
stale maymay
The Bible
Beckett's Trilogy.
Do you think the /lit/ starter kit is reliable? Am not literature guy
Did you like English class in high school? If not, lurk more because this is a summer reading list at best and kindling at worst. Which is not to say everything on there is trash, but the ratio is unacceptable.
>>9069235
It's reliably fucking plebian.
>>9069252
op here. these are books i've collected over high school. never been into novels all that much. i feel like i'm gonna get shit posting this
anarchic lit thread????
what are you fellas reading, what have you read, maybe some reccs
Currently reading On Anarchism by Chumski, would recommend The Dispossesed by Le Guin to anyone interested in anarchist sci-fi lit
my friend wanted to reply to this but claims to be too anarchic to use a computer. i couldn't understand the rest, because he's lapsed into using his personal language. he doesn't trust a medium regulated by fascist governments.
hang on, he's stopped breathing.
>>9071402
Can you say strawman?
I have anarchist sympathies and I'm always disappointed how garbage 99% of anarchist theory is. I would say that nothing on OP's list is worth reading except for Orwell, Graeber, and Haraway.
Like just take the green anarchism reading list for example. Kaczynski's writings are just the result of trauma-induced mental illness. Thoreau's mom did his laundry for him while he was in Walden. It's all either fake or anti-intellectual, but so much anarchist theory falls into the latter problem because they're so busy trying to be anti-authoritarian they forgot why.
Asked this on /his/ but didn't get an answer.
I'm reading the New Oxford Annotated Bible and upon reaching Leviticus I found this:
> Because the focus of Leviticus's narrative is the law in its divine speeches, the book is most profitably read first according to legal topic rather than from beginning to end. An initial reading might begin with a sampling of Leviticus's purity and ethical laws in chs 11-12 and 19 and rules of removal of impurity and sin as found in chs 4 and 16. To reader could then turn to other exemplary chapters: chapters 8 and 21 on the priesthood, ch 17 on slaughter and meat consumption, ch 23 on festivals, ch 25 on the sabbatical and jubilee years, and ch 26 on divine inducements and obedience. Further study may focus on a particular chapter or group of thematically related chapters, as outlined earlier.
I already know how to end from beginning to end, but what could be a good order to thematically follow up as that last sentence encourages you? I'm curious.
>>9069161
love how Leviticus BTFO liberals and women
10/10 book
>>9069170
Cool my dude but now please be nice answer my question
Uhm, I was sure it was an easy question. Maybe I was wrong.
What does /lit/ think about Nick Land?
He's shit and you're an even worse shit for making this worthless thread. I hope you die taking a shit. You fucking shit.
Did he write "Chasm"?
This man... in my country he is everything.
The great debate: who is the most important philosopher of our times?
>tfw nrx doesn't get Nick Land is a crypto-Marxist
why can't they see it kantbot?
>>9069195
Nick Land is a Fascist, he browses /pol/ and subscribes to redpill ideology
>>9069204
>everyone who believes in biology is a fascist
that's where you're wrong kiddo
What do you think is the nature of reality?
How do you know what you know?
>>9069100
I think that i know, and, as that's as good as it's gonna get, i know.
>>9069100
Reality has no nature. I know this because I don't know anything.
>>9069100
We cant be certain of the true nature of reality. For all I know I might just be a soul floating through orbit and experiencing all of this as a fever dream. Even if some angel would come from the heavens and proclaim to you what he calls the universal truth he would have no way of proving that he is indeed presenting the truth. We know nothing with certainty, we simply base our view of reality and expectation of the future on either what we were told to be true or what we perceived as a trend in the past. If I would for example drop a pen, I would expect it to fall to the ground because that is what always happened in the past when I dropped something. I have no definite way of knowing however that it could not instead disappear into the void. This is essentially what all scientific theories are based on. Observing that something happened and developing theories based on our limited understanding of the world around us. If these theories agree or seem more logical with what is considered the scientific norm of "knowledge", scientists will use it further until proven false.
I want an unquestionable – the word that comes to mind is scientific, or mathematic – way of showing that Beethoven is superior to Kanye West, that Shakespeare is superior to Stephen King: is there any theory of aesthetics that comes close to this?
What is the most persuasive and rigorous criteria to evaluate the value of a work of art that you have ever encountered (apart from survival through time)?
It bothers me to strive to achieve great results in an artistic career when every single looser can say that Star Wars is one of the greatest works of art of all time, or that Jay Z is a genius, or that Tupac is a great poet (or even a respectable poet, for the matter), and other things like that. It is a great offense to me the typical consensus that everyone has an opinion and that all opinions should be respected and that art appreciation is subjective and that there is no way to say that Beethoven is objectively superior to The Beatles.
I feel that an objective and unquestionable way to destroy the pride that everyone has to say: “I like what I like and you need to respect me” and “tastes are tastes, opinions are opinions, and everyone has their own” would be one of the greatest achievements of human thinking.
It would be glorious to show to some of Hollywood’s self-fellating industry people, to ghetto kids, to rap and hip-hop fans just how inferior their “artistic” heroes are. Unfortunately I don’t think that it will ever be possible to achieve the mental artifact to actually do it.
*loser
Also your opinion is shit.
>>9069022
/thread
ITT books written in the last 15 years that are worth reading.
example >>9067365
>>9068985
canonball
the instructions
the NIX
parallel stories
witz
the dying grass
never let me go
the buried giant
that's all I've read senpai
>>9068985
This was a motherfucking masterpiece.
Why the fuck isn't this a movie yet. Wes Anderson could smash this out if the park.
>>9068915
*of
reeee
>>9068915
Gaddis got into vague movie deal talks at one point but they never went anywhere and he became suspicious of showbiz types. No one in Hollywood actually reads so it's probably too late now.
Meme book.
Why is this guy so great again?
>qt 3.14
>wrote Illuminations, the single greatest volume of poetry ever written
>lived the boheme lifestyle and banged Paul Verlaine of all people
>was a literary genius at 19, completely stopped writing after he hit his 20s and sold slaves in Africa
>smug.jpg
He's pretty cool.
>>9068883
>smug.jpg
mentally insane
but yeah, his poetry was revolutionary because he gave no fucks in regard to and of the other (((poets))) of the time
he knew latin, from there the hexameter and was easily writing masterpieces at 17. in perfect meter, rhyme and so on.
>>9068860
Have you got meme'd again?