/lit/ - Literature

>>10079167
>They can't downvote you, so they try to make you feel like an outsider through special jargon, or an expression that your viewpoint is naive and that everybody knows full well why liking X is for chumps
This takes me to a pertinent phenomenon: copypasta.

I think copypasta is one of those institutions we've lost with time. In a sense, the modern shitpost is a micro version of copypasta, but it's lacking the extension of argument that gave copypasta its capacity for trolling. The trolling of copypasta consisted precisely in that it would make the other side think you had gone through the effort of making an argument. This illusion, however, is broken by the screencap, which puts out an old argument with sincerity, as the answer to a question, thread or new person -- screencapping in itself being a gesture of legitimacy.

This takes me to the second point: there is technically no proscription against copypasta. The modification of a piece of text changing only the relevant parts is quite common and well accepted (pic). However, pure copypasta is perfectly usable if a poster does not want to make the effort to respond originally to a repetitive topic, or if they do not have a better argument than that of the copypasta. Likewise, an original, aware response to a copypasta isn't something that is bad of itself: the reinstation of problems is conductive to their solution. In the end, to obligate people to always overpower loweffort posts is to not make good use of the technology we have.

There's always the archives and lurking as well; but that'd be a matter for another post.

>When there are so many people, to be heard at all means to say something brief, and rely on cheaper forms of quantitative feedback.
As far as I see, it's a feedback loop. Low entry levels means even more people will come.

>>13355
Your image is both true and an example of what it describes.

>>8325767
>last line
lost it

>>6572215

Stirner general?

>>4934251
>new

>>4873891
Shout out to the anon who originally posted these quotes so that I easily reposted from fuuka btw:

>>/lit/thread/S4744232#p4744271

hey goys,

check this:

is/ought

boom.

>>4411714


certainly it has consequences, solipsists are reliant on validation to form values and ideals, without social super structures (received traditions) to provide feedback, the default state is narcissism, unconditioned insecurities (what more can be said then if such solipsistic ideals become the norm among the brahmin castes too? ['only those who do not judge good from bad are good']).

they may not understand traditions the same way as more transcendent leaders do, but without them, they (ie, society) are undone.

>>4381533
Yes, when people serve ideas instead of use them.

Anyone read Eumeswil? Seems interesting as fuck.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eumeswil
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarch_(sovereign_individual)