/lit/ - Literature

>>12717052

Well that meme is somewhat acutely aware of itself as a red herring since it always sparks the same dissent and discussion about technique/technology in one way or another being a thing of its own that has taken control of, and someday may no longer need, people in order to exist.

In other words, /lit/ is sentient.

>>11266209

I'm surprised no one in this topic except >>11266455 was upset that you claim to be a boomer when you were actually born way after the 70's energy crisis and basically all of the never-ending states of economic crisis that came after. You're not only fucked but also was born straight into a fucked world. Were you really a 50's/60's kid you'd be happily enjoying your blissful ignorance by now, using our tax money to boast.

Also don't ask yourself right now what else you should be reading to learn to think, because most things will assume you know how to think by then. Just find out what stimulates you the most from reading these Greek authors first then look up whatever issues that interest you for more works.

The irony in claiming you are perhaps too old for it is also delicious since there is nowhere for you to "reach" as far as philosophy goes, and it's pretty innocent to think that issues such as the ones raised by Kant are concrete problems you can give an " ___ = ____" answer rather than lifelong projects that you might never really settle inside your head. In short, if you're thinking about what you read and want to read more, you're already doing what you were supposed to do, just don't let the edgy utilitarianism get to you.

>>11235131

>If history and biology shows us something is that the human is evil because of its nature.

Careful not to cut yourself with all that edge, this has nothing to do with Hobbes so far