/lit/ - Literature

>>23330210
I accept people's differences anfld the fact that my mode of being isn't inherently valuable or important versus others

>>23330151
>How am I supposed to take any of his writing to heart?
By thinking about it and synthesizing the parts which make sense to you while discarding the parts that don't... same way anyone who isn't an intellectual sloth interacts with any other ideas from any other source. I haven't even read Watts and have no strong feelings about him one way or the other. I'm just asking you to be more curious and rigorous in your thought instead of simply trying to find a thinker whose thoughts you can slurp up in their entirety from the spigot.

>>23330151
By accepting people's flawed nature and recognizing that a flawed man can still comprehend and articulate worthwhile ideas
Usually this is done by taking the dick out of your ass and recognizing that you're flawed too

>>23330013
That aint fa you shawty that’s for them other bitches

>>23329994
something about how desiring something attracts that thing into your life or something. sounds like /x/

>>23329994
Midwits will never stop congratulating themselves for having been able to avoid this retard magnet. Congrats you graduated from "baby's first critical thinking playground" -- now stop talking about "The Secret" because everybody who has an appropriately equipped mental faculty is not vulnerable to falling for it and regarding those who are: you can not reason with them in the first place.

>>23330058
Not entirely untrue. I see a lot of gen z kids claim they have no free will and dive further into dopamine addiction. It’s self inflicted.

>>23329994
The promise of free stuff by low effort
>dude just write down what you want on a piece of paper and have it around with you and you'll eventually get what you wish for
It is /x/ but unlike >>23330065
I believe it works to a certain extent (autosuggestion, wiring your mind towards one thing) but that you're entering a bargain with the devil when you do it.

>>23330116
>you're entering a bargain with the devil when you do it.
spooky shit

right wing Americans (and now Russians ) blaming everything on satanisim is just their way of letting me know i can dismiss everything they have to say.

One's ability to take evil seriously is too important waste on condemning harry poter or what not

Does subversive mean doesn’t agree with your style of Semitic verbal programming?

andrew anglin laughed and joked about that bitch that got run over at charllotsville and has the gaul to moral police about McCartney being "violent".

at least by his first tweet he is aware he is a moron

>>23329933
>presumably because he got molested as a child
wtf?
This gaggot definetly uses this board. There's one whiney bitch who complains all the time that Blood Meridian is a satantic piece of work.... this is your brain on christcuckery

>>23330032
you are unfathomable based, anon
this is exactly what I was looking for

>>23330042
that's a shame

>>23330048
>>23330055
You're welcome.

OP, ignore the guy, saying the Yale lectures are awful. They're not useful for learning how to make literature in a traditional sense, but they do provide a lot of worthwhile information. Just like any good book/video on a theory or a criticism, it inadverntly teaches how to add depth in your literary work and what not to do

>>23330047
no you are here to ask for shortcuts, i am here to tell you. there aren't any, and i am not going back

Read Plato's Ion

>>23330047
there are no rules to writing and you will never write anything of worth
read plato's ion and realize that what you're looking for does not exist

You are a brainlet lmao, are there people who lose their minds by reading, what sort of weak constitution inhabits your soul chud?

>>23329915
>A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything.-AC

>Insanity in individuals is something rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule.-BGE

What are you actually losing by continuing?

>>23329889
That's just masochism. Christ was not a masochist. He endured for the sake of achieving a goal. He didn't seek suffering for its own sake or make something superficially spiritual or significant out of it.

>>23329889
>beneficial effects of suffering
kek, this is what happens if you try to broaden yourself beyond a hedonistic horizon but your mind is still too constricted by angloid utilitarianism.

>>23329889
Infinite Jest and The Pale King. Although they don't really consider what you are talking about as suffering and are more about the shortsighted pleasure seeking at cost of long term happiness which results in long term needless suffering.

>>23330078
>needless
I meant to replace that with "pointless" but forgot.

>>23329889
>the beneficial effects of suffering.

Such as?

>>23330003
Western philosophy up to bachelors level. Metaphysics, ethics, epistemology, and philosophy of religion are mostly what I care about.

>>23330012
So far, so good. What thinkers? What problems captivate you the most? Do you have a preference towards metaphysical realism or nominalism?

>>23330021
Metaphysically I like Heidegger most. I can't stand reductionism. I guess you'd call that a form of nominalism.

>>23330003
Can I read Peirce without a philosophical education? I have barely read any primary literature.

>>23330083
You could because he often writes in plain English and invents his own terminology which he then tries to explain. Might be painful and you might not be motivated to care without prior experience though. And when he talks about how his work compares to other philosophers, you won't have any frame of reference.

>>23329847
pretty broad question
do you want pop science or actual science? there are no good pop science books btw

>>23329847
Go to school

>>23329815
Don't agree on it fully, but it's not the worst list. I'd recommend killing commendatore, it's not talked enough compared to other Murakami's novels

>>23329815
>S
>his worst novel
Just stop reading altogether.

>>23329815
All of it goes in the trash and if Norwegian Wood is his best then I'm even more glad that I haven't read the rest of this slop.

>>23329815
I'd read the Rat series in sequence. His first three published novels plus Dance Dance Dance. Or Hardboiled Wonderland.

>>23329956
I don't quite understand these internet acronyms, though they seem to be used in an almost random fashion. You are carried up by the pride of your heart, doggedly committed to a belief in nihilism and a belief in female depravity, extracting whatever pleasure you can from "winning" meaningless online arguments--and I am supposed to care to refute you. You should pause and consider if this is really all there is to life, or if you are not perhaps missing out on reality.

The main point I made at the beginning of this, which is less a precept of religion than an empirical fact, is that women who hate men are inevitably sluttish and slavish to male attention, and men who hate women are inevitably attracted to whores. On the other hand, chaste men and women have naive views about their gender counterparts. You appear to among the men attracted to whores, and who hates what he most wants to exploit.

Logging off the computer now, good night to you.

>>23329973
You aren't even a Christian, you're part of some anti-"judaizer" /pol/ LARP. Farewell.

>>23329876
Why is that? Is he just not essentially Japanese enough for the Japs? What makes him resonate with the Westerns more?

>>23329814
Does it matter if he's a little bit sexist? Like I don't think anyone's arguing that he's like a rabid misogynist. (Probably some are... lol) Basically his women characters are a bit cliched sometimes and they're always sexy, so it sometimes comes off like he's objectifying women somewhat. Sure, those aspects of his work should be looked at critically but even so his books are still well worth reading. Also some of his female characters actually defy stereotypes in a way that reinforces the notion that his gender poltics aren't all that bad.

>>23329816
>almost no part
I’m not saying I don’t greet from Kazakhstan occasionally but this is just naive, even putting aside that securing the lineage is the most important work in creating a civilisation

>>23329779
Better get her a hose, then

>>23329751

>>23329785
Imagine getting upset over a silly thread. Go suck cock somewhere else.

>>23329785
Nigga please don't let your dyspepsia fuck up an otherwise productive and important thread. You look even uglier than Rollo and you're upset, we get it. Take those feelings somewhere else.

>>23329751
this fag

>>23329698
>Being is difference itself

The Aoristos Dyas (Finite & Infinite) is not the Apeiron, the Apeiron is not the Monad/Absolute. The holos of the particular is predicated upon the Absolute-- is an Emmanation therefrom, but that is one way. The Apodictic Ground of All is of little account compared to apodicity in play (which is for us).

>>23329764
I want to engage with you rigorously. So first, let me translate your post into consistent Platonic terms. I hope this doesn't sound pedantic or condescending. I genuinely don't want to get confused here.
>The Aoristos Dyas (Peras & Apeiron) is not the Apeiron, the Apeiron is not the Monad/???[Absolute]. The holos of the (meros?) is predicated upon the ???[Absolute]—restated, [the holos of the (meros?)] is an ???[emanation] therefrom [the Absolute], but that is one way. The Necessary ???[Ground] of To Pan is of little account compared to necessity in play (which is for us).
I'm assuming that you're importing a Neoplatonic concept (Emanation), a Hegelian concept (Absolute), and maybe a Heideggerian concept (ground as in ground of Being, albeit many German philosophers spoke of grund from Kant onwards) to help do some heavy-lifting, although I'm uncertain as to what their correlates in Plato's thinking would be. I am also uncertain as to what Plato would have called a particular. Would it be a being? A part? Not sure. We should get that squared away.

Currently, as it stands in consistent plain academic English, your posts reads as the following:
>The Indefinite Dyad (Limit and Unlimited) is not the Unlimited, the Unlimited is not the One. The whole of the particular is predicated upon the ... —restated, whole of the particular is an ... therefrom ..., but that is one way. The Necessary Ground of The All is of little account compared to necessary in play (which is for us).

Is that a fair start? I think the things I need clarification on are:
1) What is a particular, especially in Platonic terms?
2) What is the Absolute, especially in Platonic terms?
3) What is an emanation, especially in Platonic terms?
4) What is a ground, especially in Platonic terms?
5) Why is there such a gulf between the necessity of Being and the necessity that lies in our lives as Dasein? Shouldn't they be the one and the same, like the latter is a "zoomed in" aspect of the former, a cutout of what is relevant to us as a part of the whole?

>>23329660
thats called poetry

>>23329667
no it's called silent film

>>23329660
I've found that a lot of so-called "yapping" tends to be needed examples, complications, nuances, etc., that allow you to further triangulate on a concept with precision. If you think you can grasp exactly what somebody is saying, even before they finish saying it, and then correctly apply it to every situation, then sure you can do with a book without yapping. But I think that's mostly hubris speaking.

There's also a tendency for people who have partial exposure to a subject to get annoyed when an explanation covers ground they already know. Well, a comprehensive treatment is bound to do that if you have some prior knowledge. It's a bit of a narcissistic criticism given that an explanation that is complete won't necessarily be an explanation that is tailored to Joe Schmoe and his particular needs at a given time.

There's one last kind of yapping that is not yapping, and that's when somebody is too smooth-brained to understand the idea in its entirety. So, they dismiss the extra qualifiers as an intellectual defensive mechanism instead of appreciating it as additional nourishment. Usually, these kinds of people tend to forget what they've read and fail to apply an idea in even its most rudimentary form, but they never remember their own incompetence.

>inb4 yapping
If you just read the first sentence of every paragraph, you'd have gleaned everything I needed to say. Everything else is helpful detail Not my fault you wasted your time lol.

>>23329660
Anything by Ernest Hemingway

>>23329660
Tale of genji

>>23329642
Not literature.
>>>/g/

I have a kindle paperwhite
I think a small screen size is perfectly fine so long as you're reading epubs

If anything I think smaller is better (unless you suffer from very poor eyesight).

So 6" is perfectly fine.

>>23329642
I have a paperwhite kindle, but since I read so many PDFs, and while it can handle them, only half a page at a time, I got a low to mid range Lenovo Tablet (M10 I think) specifically for reading PDFs using Moon reader pro. I haven't picked up my Kindle in about a year and the battery even died on standby. On the tab I dial the brightness down and use blue light filter and even "negative" setting on moon reader which makes the text white and page black. Highly recommend my set up.

>>23329636
Prove it.

>>23329636

>>23329636
About time I got propositioned for sex after all these years. Let’s read Romanticist poetry and spoon afterwards.