Opinions/Quotes The good, the bad

>>9696118
>starts thread
>doesn't contribute
fuck off, faggot

>>9696118
I'm on Part III. Brought it with me on a family vacation. Enjoying it so far. The philosophical discussions are interesting and the journey itself is deep and insightful. I'm a little confused about the identity of Phaedrus. Not sure if he is a real person, a ghost, or the author's alter-ego. It's weird because he shares memories and experiences with Phaedrus as if he was remembering his past life. Either way, it's been a good book. Can't wait to come home and get back to reading Dostoevsky...

>>9696118
not really meant to be any sort of serious philosophy, i consider it more of a memoir. the hardcore philosophy pseuds will come in and bash the book for not being 'good philosophy' and completely miss the point of the book.

i liked it. it was part memoir, part a look into the authors thought process.

>>9697370
Phaedrus is the author prior to his electro shock therapy. The result of the treatment had such an effect on him that he didn't even recognize his past life as even being him. He mentions something about looking in a mirror or seeing memories of his past life, and it's not him. His identity and ego is completely different after the treatment. This is slowly revealed later on in the book I think (I forget where exactly).
>inb4 complaining about spoilers

>>9696118
techno-apologist, can get rekt

if he knew the baudelaire-tier tedium that goes with acceptance of the system that caused both world wars

Give your full concentration to any task you are involved with, even the simplest.

File: 1350053198518.jpg (122KB, 625x418px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 625x418px

It is an interesting read but badly written. He tries to excuse the point of the book by turning it into a travelogue but it just makes you disoriented. It's a great gift to give friends of relatives that are known to be "rebellious" or "like philosophy" without reading any of the serious works. People are proud to showcase it in their shelfs to appear smart.

I dislike the misnomer of including the Zen in the title and then just barely mentioning some introductory Buddhist terms. The author strikes me as an extremely up-his-ass pseudo-intellectual that knows a thing or two about handling tools, which makes him better than everyone else at discussing philosophy (I know types like this, impossible to debate anything).

His value system or analysis of "quality" goes nowhere and he reveals himself to be the brainlet he is when he gets stumped by the term.

I give it 7/10 for an okay read, plus I like motorcycles so that boosts it from 4 to 7.

>>9698059
>Zen in the title and then just barely mentioning some introductory Buddhist terms
I didn't found it nessesary, because he described Zen through his own words/insights. It is also his own interpretation of it. And a maybe better way for western people to understand. Have read Lila wich closed some missing points. But the story was even more strange. Some kind of the darkside of the moon. But to complete the circle as he says.

I also read Zen and the Art of Archery, from an austrian guy. A realy short book well describing the 'japanese' way. And I realy liked the Master-Student relation.

A breezy read that does a decent job of putting you in the head of the narrator. The end where he admits he hadn't been present and kind of forgetting about his son, which was the point of the trip in a lot of ways, is significant the the books message and overlooked by people's polemic reaction to narrator's ideas.

I disliked his portrayal of mental illness as akin to enlightenment and believe that it perpetuates the mad genius trope which is harmful to real people and wildly innacurate with very rare exceptions.

I would recommend it though to a certain reader who like entry level spirituality and isnt a total snob.

>>9698059
>which makes him better than everyone else at discussing philosophy (I know types like this, impossible to debate anything)
Allthough I understand you, it's like zizek. That might be the downside of genuises. A lot are like that, a bit autistic somehow.

>His value system or analysis of "quality" goes nowhere
Well it did not went nowhere, he told that it is not defineable. Something like explaining an entire god. Its like the essence of life, the mojo or what ever.
In Lila he explained it somehow. I'll make an example: a shity car still has some quality. Not the same as a good car. But its not something you can count or weight. So quality can not be compared. And valueing somthing good or bad is just a subjective view.

>>9696118
Positively absurd.

File: b93.png (267KB, 800x820px) Image search: [Google]

267KB, 800x820px

>>9697370
>interesting
Out, out out...

>>9698801
Would you mind telling us hy? And maybe bring a better example about simmilar subkects?

>>9697898
Fascinating. I don't mind the spoiler, but I kind of liked the ambiguity of it. It's a pretty cool writing technique. Never encountered anything like it before. I guess it would have been too weird to imagine that he was inhabiting someone else's body or that he was being possessed by Phaedrus. Oh, well...

>>9698801
I liked what he had to say about Kant and Hume. The idea of looking at the world without preconceptions is interesting to me. It's a refreshing perspective. Also, I like when he talks about how travelling is better than arriving. And how much there is to gain by appreciating /this/ thing here and now that's right in front of you, rather than always focusing on your goal and it's completion. There are other things but I don't have time to talk about them right now. TTYL /lit/

I'm going camping by myself in a few days and this will be the first thing I read.

>>9698203
It can be measured of having the qualities to serve it's purpose.

It can be