/lit/ - Literature

>>20852079
>How do i get in anthropology ?
Unironically just get into Pneumaticism, Pneumatology (pneumatic phenomenology/metaphysics) and Pneumatics.

Here (the bottom line is that Western/capitalist culture has become the one global culture and replaced all other, earlier cultures):
*Abstract thought begins (behavioral modernity)
>100,000-25,000 BC: Middle- to Upper Paleolithic (Toba explosion, Neanderthal competition)
*Sedentary lifestyle begins (not for the ancestors of the West i.e. the proto-Indo-Europeans and their ancestors, who in this timeframe are WHGs, ANEs on one side and CHGs on the other)
>25,000-12,000 BC: Upper Paleolithic, Mesolithic (resource-rich ecosystem overlap)
------------------
*Agriculture begins (not for the proto-Indo-Europeans and their ancestors)
>12,000-7000 BC: Early Neolithic (Younger Dryas)
*Proto-civilization begins (proto-cities)
>7000-3500 BC: Late Neolithic (Jericho)
*Civilization begins (origins of Western civilization)
>3500-1300 BC: Bronze Age (Mesopothamia, Egypt, Bronze Age cultures)
>1300-700 BC: Bronze Age collapse, transitional period, Phoenicians (proto-Jews) influence the Greeks, basileus rule turns into oligarchy
---------------
*Western civilization begins
>700s BC: Olympic tradition starts, Roman Kingdom gets founded, "Homer" and Hesiod synthesize Greek mythology
>700-500 BC: oligarchy is replaced by fragile tyrannic rule
>509-44 BC: the beginning of democracy and Greek domination (Solonian Constitution)
>44 BC-AD 250: Roman domination (Crisis, Caesar, Actium)
>250-500: barbaric revolution (fall of Graeco-Roman culture)
>500-800: the Dark Ages and Roman Catholic domination (fall of Rome and of Justinian)
>800-1789: "feudalism" and European aristocracy (Holy Roman Empire)
---------------------
*Western civilization spreads...
>1789-1918: proto-modernism/enlightened European aristocracy (French Revolution)
---------------------
*Western civilization becomes global
*Global civilization begins
>1918-1939: modernism (WW1)
>1945-1991: post-modernism (WW2)
>1991-2022: meta-modernism (Fall of Communism + Gulf War)
>2022-2045: neo-modernism/sophistic modernism/"globalism" (COVID + War in Ukraine)
>2045-2100(?): the Dark Age (demographic crisis)
>2100(?)-2200: pneumatic modernism/enlightened globalism (new baby boom)
-----------------------
*Global civilization becomes interstellar
*Interstellar civilization begins
>2200-3000: cosmism (interstellar colonization)
>AD 3000+: galactism (entire Milky Way populated by Humanity)
>Far future: Humanity harvests high-energy plasma jets from accretion disks of black holes of Degenerate Era universe
>Ultimate fate: reintegration into everything with the conscious self-sacrifice into the black holes of Degenerate Age universe while asleep (but not dead)—the ultimate moksha of Humanity, reintegration into the Everything
the conclusion to which will be the
>dissipation of black holes and the heat death of the Universe
>and/or the Big Rip

>>20852059
Cormac is objectively better than Dostoevsky

>>20852050
>literally sounds like Big "Trans"gender just butchering children on a monetized assembly line of horror while people just sleepwalk looking at their phones.
haha that's exactly why I used that OP. great minds think alike. have you heard of the XY problem? i think it's a good introduction to a takedown of the biopolitics of transdom that manages to be politically correct
>>20851363
that's reassuring. indeed it might've been the books and the teachers who sucked, and I never happened to be tutored properly. but I think I could self-learn. I'm not a complete fuckup, I know the gist of mathematics, I just need to seriously specialize, step up, you know? what's your language? maybe we could exchange recommendations

>>20852027
>G-d help this board
is it wrong that I'd rather just read Heidegger than D&G? D&G is like the science of the midwit. the end lesson is "be kind." ok? thanks for the graphs too, i guess? but what's the Logos? *silence*

>>20851944
>Why?
Fukuyama did me well enough on that, I see no need to repeat as I consider it a banal (obvious, see the Wittgenstein quote above) statement myself
>the category of individual freedom
there's no such thing as individual freedom. there's just freedom, and justice, or unfreedom and injustice
>I don't see why we should continue to think with their concepts
freedom isn't "their" concept and liberal democracy shouldn't be thought as such either if we accept its best-ness (not even debating permanence here, just philosophically, which i have to clarify now because i can sense you're a complete midwit)
>Symbolic thinking is a gift from God the Father that we may partake in the sacramental mystery of the Eucharist and live in accordance with His will. I'm more interested in human communities than with language.
what a display of intellectual cowardice and weakness

>>20851875
>I hate these stupid fucks so much.
Because you can't do form.
Because you're Evil.
Because you wouldn't be able to tell the Form of the Good even if it was shown to you (which in itself is an impossibility, if your brainlet didn't grasp).

Unironically start with the Greeks, I mean Plato (PBUH) and repent.

>>20851787
I haven't actually read D&G yet (probably never will), but do these graphs actually mean anything or do they just go in circles like that? seems like a joke

>>20851876
>Wittgenstein terminated philosophy
thats not how he went about it
>we just have to also kill ourselves off shall we not?
you're free to do so. i will fight the globohomo, whether it's the Capital or the CCP

>>20851728
That's why I said influences.

Here's another way to conceptualize what I said here:
>>20851578
Philosophy will be transcended when analytic and continental philosophies become one, when Western and Eastern philosophies synthesize... on corpses of both of these, Truth will emerge

>>20851773
Maybe Im going to tell you how the story ends.

It ends with the Hero, the Lone Initiated, succumbing to the rest of the Initiated, thus attaining power, and seeing the world go to pieces as Modernity ends in 2071, and Eternity begins.

Eternity is a system in which the Initiated ones rule over the conformist uninitiated, and great minds are driven either to suicide or non-procreation. Eventually, an entire race of uninitiable people is bred while the Initiated continue to rule over the herd.

Hence, Eternity.

>>20851757
without delving into the minutiae, you could understand the relation as Kant being a German response to Hume (and Aristotle) and Hegel being a later German response to Kant (and Plato). philosophy is an ongoing conversation

>>20851702
>You are just a lib
There's no alternative to liberal democracy. I just work my way from that instead of succumbing to post-history.
>Your philosophy has not gone beyond the Kantian schema
It has. Noumena aren't actual entities, I say. The study of Logos (or "the Real" as you call it, thanks to Baudrillard; PS, it's really stupid that it took us over two thousand years to finally come to conclusion that objective reality exists and we don't need euphemisms) thus shouldn't concern itself with the practice of noumena but with the way that noumena influence phenomena. Such a construction itself becomes a phenomenon and thus elementary consistency and rigor is kept.

that's my take. lately i've been getting acquainted with the pragmatists, namely peirce. what's your take?

>>20851629
The quote is true.

Again, he was the weakest on socialism, pity and altruism. He was of his era and of his nation even though he tried so hard to escape the shackles, an effort which I do applaud.

>>20851618
>the overarching "rule" of poetry is that it should flow.
and it fails at that, having no meter

free verse isn't poetry

>>20851606
What I am going to point out, however, is that I still said more about Wittgenstein than you.

>>20851367
>>20851430
I see it wasn't obvious for you, so lemme explain

The artist is too dumb to explain why he does what he does.

The only influences of the Man who will ascertain/has ascertained Logos:
>Plato
>Adam Smith
>Marx
>Wittgenstein
>Baudrillard

>Philosophy is either obvious or useless
L. Wittgenstein

Take it from the learned man himself: to transcend 2,500 years of Western philosophy, ascertain Logos by expanding on Baudrillard in cognizance of Wittgenstein, using the parallax method. Try to do this using as simple language as possible for the home run (Plato succeeded at this). Then congrats, you've officially become greater than Plato.

>>20851541
>you schizo troll
NTA but you seem to have an anxiety regarding Logos. you see any implication of there being Logos as schizophrenia. you unironically need to repent in front of Plato, you've been corrupted by sophistry
>>20851536
good way to show the absurdity of Hegel
>>20851189
good way to show the inherent contradiction in Hegel

any enlightened individual knows that no philosopher ever came even close to perfection except for Plato, and even he wasn't perfect (as a philosopher, as a man he was the GOAT). everyone is inferior to Plato except maybe for Wittgenstein

>>20851514
i have counter arguments but i'm not willing to engage with an idiot. there are only 3 forms of carrying a discussion:
>elenchus/dialectics (Socrates -> Plato)
>eristic
>rhetoric
you're partaking in the latter 2. or what reddit would call "bad faith"

too bad. i'm out

>>20851504
i have a better (philosophical!) question, too: why can't you just shut up and admit you don't know stuff instead of pretending like you do?

>>20851481
>why havent these philosophers reached a single conclusion in 2000 years
Plato had. Haven't you heard that all philosophy are mere footnotes to Plato?

It's kinda true. The conversation hasn't ended yet. And the conversation matters because, like, what are your ideas? Are they really yours? Who are you? What is your self? Where does your self stem from? Where's it gonna go? Who's gonna pay for it? How?