/lit/ - Literature

>>14226779
You can babble like a schizophrenic all you want. The sociological view is the best one, because it's the only one capable of honest reflection of humanity. Christianity is full of weepy, annoying nonsense language dressed up to sound deeper than it really is.

I don't think you have to reply, I already know this conversation will go nowhere. I'll just leave you with this: being of sound mind isn't about considering all positions, but about pruning your branches of weak, dying, sickly perspectives and leaving only the strong ones to grow your vine. Christianity is patently weak, dying and sickly. Anyone seeking health should prune that branch and move forward into new uncharted lands.. don't cling to the past, people who look backwards into the past also think backwards.

>>9186853

>stop enjoying life

make me, nerd

Do you guys actually read philosophers original works? I have a passing interest in it and whenever I try to read them in their own words it seems boring and drawn out. It seems to me only necessary if you're writing a bio on them or something. I'd rather read summaries or their ideas (personally).

He wouldn't be a nazi, but he would think Hitler was a big man, like a modern Napoleon.

Not if you have will to power.

>outta the way fukkin losers

>>7050959
best /lit/ meme ever

>>6795617
>the critique of judgement
Are you autistic?

y
y
y

I'm reading Walter Kaufmann's "Tragedy and Philosophy" right now, and I'm amazed how little attention it seems to have gotten. He really tears into traditional understandings of tragedy as being all about hubris, but these readings still seem to be out there and thriving despite his (IMHO) pretty scathing critique. Are people just not aware of him or is there a good counterargument out there I should be reading?

Pic not really related, though Kaufmann seems like he's pretty respected as a Nietzsche scholar.

Hey /lit/ what is it called when someone moralises to make virtues out of their own weakness? Because it's funny as all hell.

It's similar to what Nietzsche refers to when he says: The spectacle of the Tartuffery of old Kant, equally stiff and decent, with which he entices us into the dialectic by-ways that lead (more correctly mislead) to his "categorical imperative"-- makes us fastidious ones smile, we who find no small amusement in spying out the subtle tricks of old moralists and ethical preachers.

Note that I do not mean this is what Kant was doing but the closest sentiment I can find to compare this to is expressed here by Nietzsche.
will delete thread when or if not answered

>>4944253
yeah no
>>4944255
Mad Men talks about this very well, I think one of Don Draper's quotes was like;
"But what is happiness? It's a moment before you need more happiness"

Basically happiness in the form of material (which is what advertising wants to sell you) is only as much ephemeral as you crave it, and you'll never have enough if you just keep chasing money and status.
That's why art is something almost everyone can do nowadays.

Anyone can pick up a brush and paint something, but you'll need to get people to see this, and that takes dedication.
Same thing goes with musicians, Kanye West didn't just make an album in 2004 and it just went from there, he worked for like 10 years making beats for people prior to that, and slaving away, because he believed he can make something happen out of it.

That's what writers believe in too, no one's gonna read some rich fuck's book, because usually rich people don't have much to say (I mean rich people that are rich from family funds, not self-made rich).

People who complain about other people having "iPhones, iPads, iMacs and Macbooks" while #struggle is going on elsewhere are so shallow and superficial and are the exact types of people who'd do the exact same thing if they had money, that's why they envy people who have money because they see a reflection of themselves and it creeps them out.