/lit/ - Literature

>>12369039
>Have flipped through while taking a shit.
Still say I read parts of War And Peace, but have as of yet to find those missing pages from the day of the squirts.

>>12034710
I'm working on a prebook of acclaim, accolades, ripped-from-headlines news, and just long brags from famous writers about their own works and ideas but all meant to be talking about the book that this book is hyping everyone to read. It's mostly stuff I stole from (you). It will be selfpublished and a hundred volumes will be distributed secretly to specific university libraries and used book stores. There will be a special blotter attached to a certain page that the reader may discover by using a code key, but that code key will only be accessed through aquiring a certain amount of the books, each with individually strange typos. If the reader wishes to ingest the blotter without going through this quest, they must eat every page of my prebook.

>>11920364
Can a teacher be a moderator that allows children to learn from their participation and only clarify the opposing views of philosophers, not the opinions of those children?

A good teacher knows, no, and a wise one will lead them there with gazes and smiles. What your teacher meant by Skepticism was actually Sophistry - which is a major roadblock at the cliff of Skepticism.

Ack, ah, shenanigans, bang, strike, smack and eruption, red clapped pale then blast and whack, beat and strike, whack, hit, battering up against then another whack, a hit, a wallop, a good thump taken, then bash bash smack whack smash smack whack, look out for the belt buckle, whack hit, a nice boff there, smacked him good, drub bop, another smack, whack, hiding a little, whack, hit and lambasted, whack again, hit, smack whack pelt with a shoe, whack, hit, plants one right on the kisser, another exceptual smack, drub, punch combo, backed up by another smack whack, and oh here, look out, slam, smack, whack and slog, smack whack, and a slug into the great beyound, smack whack sock smack whack swat smack whack, taken out the garbage here, another exceptual smack and drub with a tanning, yes a tanning folks, then another whack hit thrash whack hit wham smack whack whomp smack, whack, zap, where'd they get that taser from, oh no, whack hit, now subjugating with an armbar, and waving total hocus-pocus fingers at them, beholding a message lo see behold there it is see behold there you are see behold see here see behold, ta-da, see, behold, presto, behold beholder, see, look, how about that, see, behold, there you go, see, behold, look there, see, behold, bingo, see, behold, chav, irruption, gonorrhea, outbreak, clack, knock, aha, parts of speech, nouns expressions idioms, all tags of understanding, knowledge, to grasp, to take apprehension and suggest new, back to top, new search list, new rating, plus 50, ah, oh, comprehension, understanding, knowledge, well, discernment, understanding

>>11459874
I haven't got to this book yet, but will. Most of this problem does seem to be semantic though doesn't it? What is the difference between real and not-real, and is it the same as that between an illusion and reality? Doesn't the necessity of the illusion to verify the legitimacy of the reality of some thing make us aware that our language is inadequate for making such categories? The terms flatten the actual interrelationship of the illusion and the real, and that belief either way has no major consequence for pragmatic research, having only effects on ethical and esoteric matters.

>>11460094
Colour.

>>11460150
>>11460158
Depends on the definition. The fetus will follow face shapes while still in the womb, going as far as to understand the difference between a face right-side-up and up-side-down.

---

>>11460298
>>11460320

---

>>11460445
Hmm. Doesn't this dialectic show that he's right to assume that consciousness is an illusion over top of an unconscious awareness of reality, awareness of the raw data that we are preconditioned to become conscious of in certain illusory ways that help us survive. There is no observer to perceive appearances until the object is made separate from the total data received and therefore the observer is always unreal and no second awareness is possible that we can be conscious of and give attributes to.
>>11465585
I just wish there was actual interest in the subject here rather than a defense of his apparent false reality. The devolution into semantic bickering never results in anything good for religious fellows. Strange to hear them prying open arguments that leave them scrabbling every time they make a concession to rationality and research.

>>11441252
They're not subject to flux because they are true by the mystery of the illusion created in group ritual for some necessary or arbitrary cohesion, usually around a fixed loci. That the nature of flux is knowable beyond what is necessarily not-in-flux for us to act rationally, say to pick up a book which I believe is not a snake - fanged creature, not aware of our body language; and we are incapable of slivering like a snake, though we try.