/lit/ - Literature

>>19067652
Id say the go to is to try and read a primary source, then consulate a analytical text. It allows you to be better at dynamically interpreting a text yourself rather than it being regurgitated it to you. Afterwards I do think its a good idea to consult one after you tried reading the primary source to compare, contrast, and consolidate your take with that of the secondary work.

I think the real problem here is that most people need to develop dynamic interpretation and analysis skills.

Its a common thing to say, and its very often true. When talking about philosophers or important people like Marx or Neitzche or whoever. Saying "x interpretation is retarded, you dont understand y."

Are there any philosophers/big names where a thesis is more or less accepted broadly? WHere there isnt all this vague meaning and obscurity?

>>18963600
/lit/ at leasts pretends to read

pretending to read>>>>>>>>>>>>>watching youtube videos.

>>18892162
kan

You guys are pretty cool! THats a popular opinion I agree with.