/lit/ - Literature

I am currently reading the Kant's introduction to his Critique of Pure Reason and happened to encounter an argument that appears false. Kant is discussing synthetic a priori judgements, and gives the following example: "Everything that happens has its cause.", and then goes on to say that 'the concept of cause lies entirely outside the other concept, and signifies something different from 'that which happens', and is not therefore contained in any way in this latter representation.' But isn't cause implicit in an event? If 'something happens', in other words passes from a state of non-existence to a state of existence, then isn't cause deeply rooted in the 'something that happens', rendering the statement an analytic a priori judgement? I'm sorry if I'm coming out as a moron. Perhaps I am missing some subtle nuance, but I would be grateful if any of you could elucidate Kant's meaning.

pic unrelated

>>4262789
A masterful "Byronic" tale of nihilism on the Caucuses! The Leone/Eastwood stranger of Russia!

A boys Jane Austen so far. I'm enjoying it though. But Pechorin is such a cad!

Not taking afterlife into account what is the best way to live a life (or at last the one you have chosen)?
Should you act out on your desires or maybe give up them to achieve enlightenment? Is what matters the most some abstract value like art or unity with god?

>Last Three
'Invisible Cities' by Italo Calvino; 10/10, would bang.
'The End of the Tether' by Joseph Conrad; 8/10, best of Conrad's works.
'Don Juan' by Lord Byron; 9/10, I only wish it was completed before Georgie-boy went kaputt.

>Current
'Collected Poems of D. H. Lawrence'; 10/10, would defecate in bellybutton.
'The Grapes of Wrath' by John Steinbeck; 9.5/10, amazing storyteller.
'The Nicomachean Ethics' by Aristotle; 8/10.

>Next Three
'Ethics' by Benedict Spinoza.
'100 Years of Solitude' by Gabriel Garcia Marquez.
Either 'Selected Poems of Ezra Pound' or some tales, satires and shorter poems from the Wordsworth edition of Lord Byron's selected poetry.

Hey /lit/, would you rather

A: Go down in history as one of the most influential people of all time, let's say with the impact of someone like Shakespeare. This can be for your writing but not necessarily, you can be remembered for ANYthing you want to be, and exactly the way you want to be. You will never be truly forgotten by society as long as it exists.

Or

B: Attain perfect immortality. By "perfect," what is meant is not invincibility, but rather complete control over your own mortality. You will never be killed by anything so long as you want to live, but if you wish to die, you can end it all with a thought. However, the catch is that you will not have any influence at all in the world, so long as you live. You can have a few friends and what not, but you will not be especially popular, no more so than the average person. Even if you try for a million years to attain fame or recognition, you will never be respected or renowned for anything you do.

One most only wonder what kind of force crafted the spheres on which we dwell. How his temperament most have been as he adjusted the sun's brightness and how he meddled with the levers of time and space to create our bubble of thought within the bounds of being. How he swept the brush strokes of rivers, tress, birds and all the features that are to be found in the world's miscellany of stories. Oh yes, the world as we see it at any instance, is nothing but an open page in of a grand book that tells of all our intertwined love, jealousy and tragedies.What sort of maniac painted us. What kind of story is he writing?

As most of you probably know, the great philosophical questions of human kind (how did we get here? what is the meaning of life?) have been answered by science.
We are all soulless machines and everything we do, say, and think is directly determined by the laws of physics.
It's pretty dificult to live on just like before after realizing that, right?
Well for most of you, it's not. And that's why I love discussing this topic on 4chan.
You comfort yourself with awesome theories like
>yeah well life has no objective meaning but i can create a subjective meaning cuz i read that on a motivational poster
>science is like a fucking religion you can believe in it just like i believe in god you cant be sure who's right anyway
>but i love my gf, if love isn't real how come i don't fall in love with meth and heroin and get addicted
>lol you spelld difficult wrong you fucking candy-ass
Please fascinate me with stories like this again.

>What do you think of my poem?

Wandering days:

In my hands I wield an old tarnished walking stick
through many miles of field and bushes thick
until I came to the shore of a lonely promontory
and watched out towards the endless heaving sea.

As I stood there in silent trance
watching the lapping waters dance
I left my burdens with a trickling tear
and felt my destination drawing near,
at the end of my wandering ways
as I waded through the water's depth,
at the end of my wondering days
as I waited through my final breath.