Archived threads in /lit/ - Literature - 752. page

File: lead_82079.png (534KB, 820x550px) Image search: [Google]

534KB, 820x550px

characters > critics

The Author is Always Right by J.K.K. Rowlien

>>9700199
Unironically DFW's "Greatly Exaggerated"

>>9700010
>Ever reading abridged version.
You already know the answer but refuse to accept it.

>>9700031
No, but seriously, I want "the" best version available, /lit/ wiki told me the Royall translation was the most literal.

File: 1476384175461.jpg (57KB, 1022x547px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 1022x547px

>>9700103
well you see the most literal translation is not always the best. Oftentimes you should read anything personal, such as letters or notes the translator has written about their work to see what they know of interpreting an original language. A story isn't a manual to interpret word for word, it's something that relies on the more vague inconsistencies of human language to depict life, literal translation while insuring that you piece is free from nearly any voice what so ever, will butcher some of those inconsistencies, and make it barbaric to read.

>>9699903
> My values seem to align with Libertarianism above any other ideology, and I would like to read up on it more.

I want something that will reassure me of what I already believe. How pedestrian of you.

> I want to learn enough to draft up a plan for a hypothetical society.

Cringe.

Seriously, start with the Greeks. Work up from there.

>>9699919
If you're not going to post anything productive I have no interest in your opinion.

>>9699919
I'm not trying to reassure myself you mental midget, I see holes in the ideology and want to fill them in.

>>9699845
Yeah, if you like shit.

Yeah, if you like left-wing downsyndrome spicshit.

Reading is for gays and losers.

>>9699749
Eh, what is this? I wanna get straight into modern politics. But this looks like a fun read though and so I will be checking it out.

>>9699735

Reading some lame "Intro to blah blah" by Middle-Class Good Guy will kill your interest fast.

What you really mean by "political ideologies" is that you want to study political systems, in which case your studies if honestly pursued will take you to places that at first glance ostensibly have nothing to do with politics. You're studying ways of organizing human society, thus you need a study of human society in general.

As ever, start with the fucking Greeks.
Herodotus and Thucydides.
In Herodotus there's an interesting socratic dialogue between Darius and other princes of persia about which political system they are going to set up for their people. They debate between several possibilities before deciding on absolute monarchy.
Thucydides is on the surface a history of a war but there's a strong political undercurrent in the entire work, ranging from the excellent speeches given by some of the principal actors to the conflict between two vastly different political systems in Sparta and Athens.

After this you need to study Rome whose main contribution to the world was its law and jurisprudence.

Wow you weren't kidding. Do "List of Goofs" and "List of Gags" really need to be separate articles?

>>9699627
That's our Pynchmeister!

I wonder if Pynchon himself ever edits the Wiki.

translations doesn't matter that much in classical phylosophy like Plato.

File: 9780872203495.jpg (10KB, 256x391px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 256x391px

Sort of thinking about going with the Complete Works which is translated by Cooper.

Seems handy to have it all in one.

>>9699585
The Bloom is an excellent translation, and his notes are incredibly helpful (he really attends to the language). I read it myself and can vouch. The essay isn't bad per se but it is a "Straussian" (for Leo Strauss) reading of Plato which most Plato scholars disagree with and dislike.

The Grube-Reeve translation in the Hackett Complete Works is good, as well. The recommended translation in the seminar I took with a Plato specialist last year was Reeve's, but in a standalone paperback. I'm not sure if this differs from the one in the Complete Works.

>>9699342
> OP doesn't see the hypocrisy in his post

>>9699342
Your post sucks and so do you.

>>9699342
Good post

>>9699298
Self murdered.

wahhh wahhh boo hoo hurrr durrr durrr hurrr I'm so """"""depressed""" too intelligent to be """""sincere"""" snivel snivel no one understands my genius DOHH hurrr durr hurrr wahhh wahhhhhh I'll show them my true worth!!!!!!!!

>>9699298
He was murdered.
By that fucking rope he hung himself with.
You bitch nigga.

just a single bump because i was genuinely interested to see what people had to say

It preaches both peace and war. It has something for everyone. Kind of necessary if you want to start a world religion.

>>9699294
I wouldn't know but I'm curious too, please read it and make a review here

And don't forget the hadiths

>This can surely be observed hitherto all the philosophical interventions and theories conceived- Wittgenstein, some often proclaim that his expertise limited his acroamatic ideas and propositions, restricted his supposition of claims when he was writing Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. It showed an exemplary of a well-refined, impregnable work. The problem here is that his work showed great grasp of linguistics, pragmatics, semantics and formal logic. His mastery in epistemology and etymology is indubitable. Look closely, and you’ll realise that his book did all the justice that epistemology, etymology, linguistic relativism has to offer. In which Descartes and Bertrand Russell probably arrived at before. This book took a step to redefine and polish all the definitions available in the field, but it seems his knowledge impacted on his ability to be an exemplar, a revolutionist. This further interprets that “experts” differ from “intelligence” since the usage and comprehension of such skills needs one to show clues of “genius”. We know that Wittgenstein possesses all these knowledge, but did he apply it to make it rather palpable, his veracity deterred his ability to express “genius? That further says that “genius” cannot be related to “expertise”.

>To further extrapolate on my statements, I would need to talk about the philosophy of David Hume, Arthur Schopenhauer and more Immanuel Kant, perhaps Friedrich Nietzsche as well.. But I’ll leave that for another day, for some rationalism, the preponderance of the argument is much more vast than my answer can consist of. I cannot truly define what “intelligence” means, nor can I articulate upon what the societal norms and communal prejudice seek and desire from said “intelligence”. This cannot be done, there is no agreeable or conspicuous idea we can follow, for above we see a perfectly tangible and discernible conception that can be grasped with ease. Hindmost lays all the recherche concepts that we as humans, has yet to unravel. Sui generis. Quasi, pseudo and ostensible truth that it is.

>“Primum est, ex eo quod mens humana in se conversa non percipiat aliud se esse quàm rem cogitantem, non sequi ejus naturam sive essentiam in eo tantùm consistere, quod sit res cogitans, ita ut vox tantùm caetera omnia excludat quae forte etiam dici possent ad animae naturam pertinere. Cui objectioni respondeo me etiam ibi noluisse illa excludere in ordine ad ipsam rei veritatem (de quâ scilicet tunc non agebam), sed dumtaxat in ordine ad meam perceptionem, adeo ut sensus esset me nihil plane cognoscere quod ad essentiam meam scirem pertinere, praeterquam quod essem res cogitans, sive res habens in se facultatem cogitandi. In sequentibus autem ostendam quo pacto, ex eo quod nihil aliud ad essentiam meam pertinere cognoscam, sequatur nihil etiam aliud revera ad illam pertinere.

>Alterum est, ex eo quod ideam rei me perfectioris in me habeam, non sequi ipsam ideam esse me perfectiorem, & multo minùs illud quod per istam ideam repraesentatur existere. Sed respondeo hîc subesse aequivocationem in voce ideae: sumi enim potest vel materialiter, pro operatione intellectûs, quo sensu me perfectior dici nequit, vel objective, pro re per istam operationem repraesentatâ, quae res, etsi non supponatur extra intellectum existere, potest tamen me esse perfectior ratione suae essentiae. Quomodo verò, ex hoc solo quod rei me perfectioris idea in me sit, sequatur illam rem revera existere, fuse in sequentibus exponetur.” From Meditations on First Philosophy. (This time, Descartes did know some philosophy.)

>>9699178
psued

Why do prostate smugglers jam fat unwashed pricks into their face and mouth?

We need a /you/ board for Youtube threads.

This is not literature.

>>9699098
i only hate him for supporting zionism

get bombed bookkike

>>9699094

Answer the question, anon.

>>9699092
Aristotle's Metaphysics, 25

Here's the first thing that stuck out to me in the first book:

>...for the wise man must not be ordered but must order, and he must not obey another, but the less wise must obey him.

Importantly, he doesn't say this as an ethical prescription. He's describing the common conception of wisdom and what it means to be wise, and uses this assertion to advance the argument that true wisdom is concerned with knowledge for its own sake, and not knowledge for some practical application.

I think this is a rather strange holdover from Plato's enlightened autocrat. Why should wisdom necessarily have the power to command others, especially when said wisdom isn't actually of any utility?

I really, really, really like this image.

>>9699090
Alright hurry up and release whatever he was working on, then, please.

>>9699090
you are fucking sad man

well they say write about what you know so why don't you write about you being a fucking faggot

memes

>>9699011
It should be a string of goofy gags with no real plot