/lit/ - Literature

>The nature of our intellect is such that ideas are said to spring by abstraction from observations, so that the latter are in existence before the former. If this is really what takes place, as is the case with a man who has merely his own experience as his teacher and book, he knows quite well which of his observations belong to and are represented by each of his ideas; he is perfectly acquainted with both, and accordingly he treats everything correctly that comes before his notice. We might call this the natural mode of education.
>On the other hand, an artificial education is having one’s head crammed full of ideas, derived from hearing others talk, from learning and reading, before one has anything like an extensive knowledge of the world as it is and as one sees it. The observations which produce all these ideas are said to come later on with experience; but until then these ideas are applied wrongly, and accordingly both things and men are judged wrongly, seen wrongly, and treated wrongly. And so it is that education perverts the mind; and this is why, after a long spell of learning and reading, we enter the world, in our youth, with views that are partly simple, partly perverted; consequently we comport ourselves with an air of anxiety at one time, at another of presumption. This is because our head is full of ideas which we are now trying to make use of, but almost always apply wrongly. This is the result of [Greek: hysteron proteron] (putting the cart before the horse), since we are directly opposing the natural development of our mind by obtaining ideas first and observations last; for teachers, instead of developing in a boy his faculties of discernment and judgment, and of thinking for himself, merely strive to stuff his head full of other people’s thoughts. Subsequently, all the opinions that have sprung from misapplied ideas have to be rectified by a lengthy experience; and it is seldom that they are completely rectified. This is why so few men of learning have such sound common sense as is quite common among the illiterate.

So, /lit/, how does it feel to have an artificial education?

>When we read, another person thinks for us: we merely repeat his mental process. It is the same as the pupil, in learning to write, following with his pen the lines that have been pencilled by the teacher. Accordingly, in reading, the work of thinking is, for the greater part, done for us. This is why we are consciously relieved when we turn to reading after being occupied with our own thoughts. But, in reading, our head is, however, really only the arena of some one else's thoughts. And so it happens that the person who reads a great deal—that is to say, almost the whole day, and recreates himself by spending the intervals in thoughtless diversion, gradually loses the ability to think for himself; just as a man who is always riding at last forgets how to walk. Such, however, is the case with many men of learning: they have read themselves stupid. For to read in every spare moment, and to read constantly, is more paralysing to the mind than constant manual work, which, at any rate, allows one to follow one's own thoughts. Just as a spring, through the continual pressure of a foreign body, at last loses its elasticity, so does the mind if it has another person's thoughts continually forced upon it. And just as one spoils the stomach by overfeeding and thereby impairs the whole body, so can one overload and choke the mind by giving it too much nourishment. For the more one reads the fewer are the traces left of what one has read; the mind is like a tablet that has been written over and over. Hence it is impossible to reflect; and it is only by reflection that one can assimilate what one has read if one reads straight ahead without pondering over it later, what has been read does not take root, but is for the most part lost. Indeed, it is the same with mental as with bodily food: scarcely the fifth part of what a man takes is assimilated; the remainder passes off in evaporation, respiration, and the like.

How does /lit/ respond to unhappy German man?

More can of the same can be found here:
https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/s/schopenhauer/arthur/lit/chapter5.html

>>9539916
>A nice platitude but if life really is meaningless, any meaning I pretend to give it will ultimately be in vain.

So? If you're willing to admit it then you're also willing to admit that the fact that these meanings are not objective bears no significance in a meaningless universe. your desire for truth is merely a prejudice: you're already justifying your actions by merely tuning your will on those frequencies that you like the most, that you desire by either istinct or conditioning (mainly societal).

This, by the way, should not keep you away from studying metaphysics and philosophy in general. Even if nothing is true, these ideas can still be of use for you: your problems may be all, ultimately, biological, but they still remain problems, things that you probably son't desire. In this case, contemplation of both the meaningless and the meaningfulness of the most detailed philosophical systems ever concieved, can still help you moving in the direction that you desire the most. Since Wagner was a composer, Schopenhauer was infinitely useful to him, and single-handedly bought him to achieve his dream.
Or you may as well read only for the aesthetic experience: once you can look him from outside, Kant's ouvre shines in a different way, in the way high art should shine.

>>9515141
>tfw you can't punch these "people" in the face

I'm an hardcore commie, and I'd still love to reduce her face to mush. Fuck her.

>>9286275
>Newfags don´t recognize this stale pasta
>Newfags will claim "I was only pretending to be ignorant"
Lurk moar fagets

Which philosophers have the best prose, stylistically? Hardmode: No Nietzsche, Schopenhauer or Kierkegaard

Ironically, I think the biggest pseuds are those hiding behind academia with lots of credentials to prove themselves with.

Those verbose internet blogs that get dismissed as pseudo intellectual bullshit? More often than not, they're discussing ideas clearly, and (as we've seen in the last election), hitting on very important points that get ignored by the mainstream. Unlike professors, who more often than not simply buy/work their way into a position of authority, bloggers and meme writers stand on the quality of their ideas.

Every time I've ever rolled my eyes at an "intellectual", they've been a professor at some prestigious university.

>>9093436
>although they never verbalize it — is "And why is continuing to breathe better than suicide?"

I've never met a person who couldn't entertain that thought that I didn't respect on an intellectual level.

Being able to discuss Schoppy is actually a great intellectual litmus test when it comes to separating the pseudo intellectuals from the smart people.

>I'm depressed and the way my mind works subjectively shows that things are pretty bad so... YOU'RE ALL DEPRESSED!! YOU'RE ALL SUFFERING!! I WIN!! I'M NOT ALONE ANYMORE HAH!

Why do people take this short bald faggot seriously again? he looks like a fucking rockhopper penguin lmao

>120 Days of Sodom will never be finished, and we will never feast on the glory of all 120 planned days
Feels bad man

What are his essential companions?

>>8965784
humanity's capacity to overcome itself

What's the best translation of The World as Will and Representation by Schopenhauer?

Is Parerga et Paralipomena good ? I found a good edition on Amazon and I want to have the paper version of "On Women". Though, it's about 300 pages long and I wouldn't like to buy it if it's only to read a dozen of pages.

If, bearing this in mind, one considers the important role which love plays in all its phases and degrees, not only in dramas and novels, but also in the real world, where next to one’s love of life it shows itself as the strongest and most active of all motives; if one considers that it constantly occupies half the capacities and thoughts of the younger part of humanity, and is the final goal of almost every human effort; that it influences adversely the most important affairs; that it hourly disturbs the most earnest occupations; that it sometimes deranges even the greatest intellects for a time; that it is not afraid of interrupting the transactions of statesmen or the investigations of men of learning; that it knows how to leave its love-letters and locks of hair in ministerial portfolios and philosophical manuscripts; that it knows equally well how to plan the most complicated and wicked affairs, to dissolve the most important relations, to break the strongest ties; that life, health, riches, rank, and happiness are sometimes sacrificed for its sake; that it makes the otherwise honest, perfidious, and a man who has been hitherto faithful a betrayer, and, altogether, appears as a hostile demon whose object is to overthrow, confuse, and upset everything it comes across: if all this is taken into consideration one will have reason to ask —“Why is there all this noise? Why all this crowding, blustering, anguish, and want? Why should such a trifle play so important a part and create disturbance and confusion in the well-regulated life of mankind?” But to the earnest investigator the spirit of truth gradually unfolds the answer: it is not a trifle one is dealing with; the importance of love is absolutely in keeping with the seriousness and zeal with which it is prosecuted. The ultimate aim of all love-affairs, whether they be of a tragic or comic nature, is really more important than all other aims in human life, and therefore is perfectly deserving of that profound seriousness with which it is pursued.
As a matter of fact, love determines nothing less than the establishment of the next generation. The existence and nature of the dramatis personae who come on to the scene when we have made our exit have been determined by some frivolous love-affair. As the being, the existentia of these future people is conditioned by our instinct of sex in general, so is the nature, the essentia, of these same people conditioned by the selection that the individual makes for his satisfaction, that is to say, by love, and is thereby in every respect irrevocably established. This is the key of the problem. In applying it, we shall understand it more fully if we analyse the various degrees of love, from the most fleeting sensation to the most ardent passion; we shall then see that the difference arises from the degree of individualisation of the choice.

So I read "On Women"

Are you fucking kidding me? This is the most bitter, MRA, virgin autist bullshit I've ever read. Not even a feminist, but this might make me one. I know he hated his mom and was turned down by a 17 year old, but is there any reason why he wrote this? Is there a reason for his taking the time to vomit this onto a page?

Please tell me no white person today actually thinks like this.

>>8823907
>Is.

>Neither for music, nor for poetry, nor for fine art have they any real or true sense and susceptibility, and it is mere mockery on their part, in their desire to please, if they affect any such thing. This makes them incapable of taking a purely objective interest in anything, and the reason for it is, I fancy, as follows. A man strives to get direct mastery over things either by understanding them or by compulsion. But a woman is always and everywhere driven to indirect mastery, namely through a man; all her direct mastery being limited to him alone. Therefore it lies in woman’s nature to look upon everything only as a means for winning man, and her interest in anything else is always a simulated one, a mere roundabout way to gain her ends, consisting of coquetry and pretense.

>>8719233
Results confirm

>>8693508

>"I did, however, pass by one young girl, and she was like a goddess who came down from heaven. She was walking alone, in her bathing suit, with her luscious blonde hair blowing in the wind. I couldn’t help but slyly admire her beauty as we passed by each other. I was scared. I was scared that she might view me as nothing but an inferior insect who’s presence ruins her atmosphere. Her beauty was intoxicating! And then, just as we passed each other, she actually looked at me. She looked at me and smiled. Most girls never even deigned to look at me, and this one actually looked at me and smiled. I had never felt so euphoric in my life. One smile. One smile was all it took to brighten my entire day. The power that beautiful women have is unbelievable. They can temporarily turn a desperate boy’s whole world around just by smiling."

Woah! No wonder he wrote On Women!

Mommy Issues and Butthurt: The Person

>The world is Will
What did he mean by this?

>hates women
>argues like one

Fucking lol.

>>6826415
Hegel was a faggot.