/lit/ - Literature

Why does everything have to be about sexual deviancy and/or mental illness to be considered literature nowadays? Why can't it be about literally anything else?

>>19523098
>It's kind of like trying to explain how the existence of chainsaws doesn't solve Russel's paradox: They're totally unrelated to each other.
You're exaggerating quite a bit here and it honestly comes off as slightly disingenuous.

>This raises questions about whether the universe is discrete or continuous
Indeed it does, but if the universe is discrete the difficulty is instantly resolved; the paradox really relies on the assumption that the universe is continuous (which seems to be the more attractive model for most people, I think, not many people can stomach the idea that we live in a pixel world).

>whether infinitely many events can take place in finite time
Well, we all know that time, being continuous, is made up of infinitely many instances, but the difficulty is in whether motion can be preserved in the frozen instant or whether an infinite set of distances can be traversed. Aristotle addresses the first of these here:
> Zeno's reasoning, however, is fallacious, when he says that if everything when it occupies an equal space is at rest, and if that which is in locomotion is always occupying such a space at any moment, the flying arrow is therefore motionless. This is false, for time is not composed of indivisible moments any more than any other magnitude is composed of indivisibles.
You see, the instant is being treated stealthily as a discrete object instead of as a point (following Euclid, that which has no part) and Aristotle calls this out. Calculus is careful to preserve the subtle distinction—recall the roundabout nature of the definition of the limit or Berkley's criticism of infinitesimals for being "the ghosts of departed quantities" (the distinction then, although preserved, was employed clumsily and infinitesimals consequently were mathematically suspect for many years hence, until they're legitimization as a non-standard alternative in the 1960s). This, together with some basic facts (e.g. the quicker of any two given beings being defined as traversing a greater distance in equal time, less distance takes less time to traverse, etc., etc.) kind of kill this paradox by reducing it to a simple math problem.

> Well, duh, everyone already knows Achilles will catch up with the hare. That argument doesn't tell us anything.
The conclusion is obvious to everyone but the logic of how it could be so is not—and there in lies the paradox—the use of calculus is meant to clarify this logic; you are, therefor, missing the point when you say "duh" because the point of such a demonstration isn't the conclusion but the very logic of the method, viz. taking the limit of a converging infinite series, being used to derive it.

books shouldn't have titles because they are spoilers

are you a platonist or an aristotelian

>>17515071
I am normally a frogposter, but I did not have a frog that conveyed the gleeful ambition of that anime image. Regardless, ad hominem, seethe dilate cope &c.

What are some books about the incredible vulnerability and brevity of a human life?

How would I list literature, philosophy and poetry as a hobby without people thinking that I'm a pretentious person?

I've never seen an intelligent person use ebooks.

>>13102296
>To point out that /lit/ is dying?
Yes

>>10803359
I appreciate the KOTOR meme