/lit/ - Literature

>>22437914

i say most of these and also use them in my writings

>>17322109
what's wrong with frogs?

>>15768247
based and wholesomepilled

fren thread!

Idealism vs Materialism vs Processism

Which one is right?

The Book of Disquiet

unironically the year i started reading
i have read:
the theogany
the journey to the west
the prose edda
the poetic edda
the penses
Institutiones Divinae
and a book named tampa. that one was pretty bad but that's what I get for being a coomer i suppose.
all in all reading is fun and i have learned a lot of new words

For example " I hope my death makes more cents than my life "

how can one translate it in Spanish , Japanese , chinese or any other language.

I've clozed captioned infinite jest

>>14196884
a story about apu helping strangers and making frens

the notes from the underground
the picture of dorian grey
the things they carried
the glass castle
fear and loathing in las vegas

>>14134776
>he thinks he can leave
>he thinks he is in control
OH NO NO NONONONONONONO

Idealism vs Materialism vs Processism

Which one is right?

>>14102368
No it's amō. WHAT DO

“And the opinions of the scientists quoted by are not even on the level of Einstein or Oppenheimer. Their pomposities, in fact, do not rise to the level of the average. They are vague generalities inherited from the nineteenth century, and the fact that they represent the furthest limits of thought of our scientific worthies must be symptomatic of arrested development or of a mental block. Particularly disquieting is the gap between the enormous power they wield and their critical ability, which must be estimated as null. To wield power well entails a certain faculty of criticism, discrimination, judgment, and option. It is impossible to have confidence in men who apparently lack these faculties. Yet it is apparently our fate to be facing a ‘‘golden age” in the power of sorcerers who are totally blind to the meaning of the human adventure. When they speak of preserving the seed of outstanding men, whom, pray, do they mean to be the judges. It is clear, alas, that they propose to sit in judgment themselves. It is hardly likely that they will deem a Rimbaud or a Nietszche worthy of posterity. When they announce that they will conserve the genetic mutations which appear to them most favorable, and that they propose to modify the very germ cells in order to produce such and such traits; and when we consider the mediocrity of the scientists themselves outside the confines of their specialties, we can only shudder at the thought of what they will esteem most '‘favorable.’* None of our wise men ever pose the question of the end of all their marvels. The “wherefore’* is resolutely passed by. The response which would occur to our contemporaries is: for the sake of happiness. Unfortunately, there is no longer any question of that. One of our best-known specialists in diseases of the nervous system writes: “We will be able to modify man’s emotions, desires and thoughts, as we have already done in a rudimentary way with tranquillizers.’* It will be possible, says our specialist to produce a conviction or an impression of happiness without any real basis for it. Our man of the golden age, therefore, will be capable of “happiness5* amid the worst privations. Why, then, promise us extraordinary comforts, hygiene, knowledge, and nourishment if, by simply manipulating our nervous systems, we can be happy without them? The last meager motive we could possibly ascribe to the technical adventure thus vanishes into thin air through the very existence of technique itself. But what good is it to pose questions of motives? of Why? All that must be the work of some miserable intellectual who balks at technical progress. The attitude of the scientists, at any rate, is clear. Technique exists because it is technique. The golden age will be because it will be. Any other answer is superfluous

/prosecrit/
Post some non poetry works and get feedback. Please for the love of god respond to someone.