Archived threads in /lit/ - Literature - 3915. page

benis and alzo dig und ball D:

I don't understand this shitty meme
Is it from reddit

>>7991126
I know a guy who wanted to translate it, wait I'll send it to him.

>>7991148
You Arab ?

>>7991157
No, I'm Stirnerian. My friend's from Jordan.

>>7991102

0/10

File: 1437449017523.jpg (84KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 512x512px

>>7991102
go away

Book nine is my favorite, OP. The new episode is based on the other one though.

>REE
>Frogposting
Is this normal for /lit/ or is OP just a particularly cancerous faggot?

The fuck?

90% of people don't read. No-one's going to judge you if you don't.

Just read the sparknotes page like everyone else fucking does.

In this case you're imagining a hippogryph by assembling borrowed images, not conceptualizing it, whatever that word would mean for Descartes.

>>7991011
All things are related to perfection: in themselves, they are nearer or further away from perfection. However, in themselves, things are not nearer or further away for nearer from "hippogryph-hood".

Everything I see has some perfection or absence of perfection, yet, I conceptualise (think) perfection: this perfection must be inspired or in some way given by god.

>>7991050
The irony of Descartes argument is that perfection, or Godliness, is unknowable to the imperfect man. Therefore he cannot possibly point to a relation which he is unable to define.

He says in the fifth meditation that God's perfection would prevent him from deceiving. By what objective criteria is deception excluded from perfection? Did not God deceive Abraham when he commanded him to sacrifice Isaac?

>>7990964

My Dad will dip into a sf/f novel once in a while.

My little brother's just getting into meme-/lit/ and he obviously doesn't quite understand them or literature in general. I'm kind of worried about it.

My Mom only reads self-help books. We have like a couple hundred of them she's read through. It's kind of depressing.

No making fun of others for reading too much in our family. Aside from me and my brother, we don't talk about books at all.

>>7990981
>My little brother's just getting into meme-/lit/ and he obviously doesn't quite understand them or literature in general. I'm kind of worried about it.
What the fuck is meme-/lit/? Anyway he's still young, it's great if he reads anyway.

>>7990981
starting with meme lit is a good thing anon. Its how people get into proper literature. the reason we meme stuff is so people will actually read them

File: 9780719564475.jpg (30KB, 400x430px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 400x430px

>>7990889
Basically Russians and Brits killing each other for 200 years in northern afghanistan, india, and tibet

tibet is a tourist trap with a flag

>>7990899
But it's pretty

>>7990887
>from a frustrated skeptics point of view
Ayy lmao
Fuck off back to >>>/x/

>>7990847
I don't know who this is. Could you explain why he is good?

>>7990847
>>7990892
Shan's the name and pre teen fiction is his game.

It's not great stuff but was a good time when I was 12. Seriously OP this isn't really the place for low brow fiction.

>>7990847

I'm a fan of his, but I'd agree with this poster >>7990904 . OP, try reading the Procession of the Dead that he wrote under the name D.B.Shan. It's pretty good albeit VERY teeny, but better certainly than the demon stuff has always seemed from its edgy subject matter and covers.

>>7990740
The one in your picture is the best.
Julie rose should be avoided at all costs.

>>7990740
The wilbour translation or the modified wilbour translation (by McAfee I think).

Signet edition is the best.

>>7990727
Our major problem is a lack of violence, not too much.

>>7990734
ok well I already know 4channer all crave violence

>>7990727
>violence is sort of a new past time in the US
Violence has been on the decline in the US for decades. I personally think videogames as a release of aggression/zombifying factor are to "blame"

>>7990712
RE: the Herman book, it's not very good. It's a pop book, with a pop understanding of Plato and Aristotle, which uses a bunch of assumptions about the characters and lives of each that are really based more on modern assumptions than anything that's either attested or in the texts themselves. The worst is this dumb assumption that Plato dismisses experience, which is simply not true and which is brought up over and over again as a starting point for all inquiries in the dialogues, and this peculiar take on Aristotle as an empiricist, a take that the early moderns (Machiavelli, Hobbes, Descartes, Bacon) certainly didn't take when they were accusing him of idealist nonsense with his discussion of substantial forms in the Metaphysics.

A better take (that I don't fully buy) is Gadamer's book, "The Idea of the Good in the Philosophy of Plato and Aristotle":

https://mega.nz/#!XYx1XDwK!fkjpKfjZTodDvP2t1cptpJqviKvGr2DVdzRsjdOgcbY

Another good one (that I'm pretty well persuaded by) is Ronna Burger's commentary on Aristotle's Ethics, which reads it as a work of Platonic philosophizing:

https://mega.nz/#!zN4X2CAa!cx7vA6OB3sLClCrSEsto_Mc2JnHJWHzzJa6DUyp01sE

>What books, other than those written by the philosophers themselves, are good for explaining the views of a given philosopher?
To be completely honest, not very much. Commentaries or scholarly works such as that which I even shared just above only hit the mark insofar as they make good sense of the texts themselves. They can be helpful in that way, insofar as they have to be clear enough about the text that when you read the thing itself, the commentary isn't leaving anything out or ignoring anything. It stands and falls in front of you.

Stuff like Werner Jaeger's speculative work on Aristotle's development, on the other hand, is so baseless and marked by modern assumptions and canons of coherence as to be worthless as a guide. In general, while there *may* be development among thinkers, any scholarly works that focus on development almost exclusively, or that raise arguments entirely dependent on a claim of development that cannot itself be satisfactorily shown is worthless. (A lot of scholarship on Plato and Aristotle has this bad tendency.)

When it's done with proof in the texts themselves, it can be pretty eye-opening, however (Hobbes, Bacon, Leibniz).

Go away Paul, nobody here wants to see your pale nips and book of pop-teir morality plays.

>>7990927
>pop
you mean top

>>7990927
Paul.. On /adv/ he is known as Brandon.

He is literally on every board and causing havoc. I'm honestly intrigued about what he does in his life apart from 4chan.

>>7990690
>I've been looking everywhere in Toronto and I can't seem to get it

tfw copped the last copy from Indigo

I haven't read a lot of it but it's almost entirely dialogue which can be followed if you're paying close attention. It gets really fun, actually, because Gaddis has a great ear for dialogue.

>>7990747
that's funny I never even thought of going to a book store that sells new books.

File: IMAG0219.jpg (2MB, 2688x1520px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2688x1520px

>>7990690
I've said it before (>>7983229), it's one of the best, most insightful, prescient and funny books I've ever read (almost a laugh a page). Here's a sampler, from when things really start rolling.

bukowski

>>7990666
wrong
u satan mane

dr Seuss