I don't understand the difference between this book and a 14 year old's first existential crisis.
The only difference I can discern is the language and clarity of thought.
Nevertheless, it is still the same philosophy and juvenile thoughts.
I would rather listen to death & black metal to get the same message than read this.
How did this get published? How did this get recognition?
It should be a one page book that reads "read Schopenhauer"
And yet, what is an appropriate argument to this book and its philosophy?
le epic poo
desu
>>8891996
Wot
>stance x is juvenile
>cant come up with a single counterargument against x
That's real fucking embarrassing considering Ligotti isn't even a philosopher looking to make a case but a stylist which shows in his writing.
Besides it's useless trying to debate axiology, either you're an unempathetic natalist breeder who throws accusations of immaturity and encouragements to suicide around or not, the universe doesn't contain moral facts that would make either party wrong objectively.
>>8891906
Read Songs of a Dead Dreamer and Grimscribe and Teatro Grottesco then report back
>>8891906
Book presents you with agregated opinion of anti-natalists and nihilists. You decide if it speaks to you.
If you're an intelligent person you should appreciate learning about views different than your own, even if you don't agree with them.
Bitch.
>>8891906
Give these a read if you want some more info on Ligotti.
An Interview with Thomas Ligotti
Born to Fear
Conducted by SÅ‚awomir Wielhorski
>http://www.teemingbrain.com/interview-with-thomas-ligotti-2/
The Horror of the Unreal - The New Yorker
By Peter Bebergal
>http://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/the-horror-of-the-unreal