/lit/ - Literature

>>16764738
I thought we were speaking in logic.

>Sophia alleged that her husband’s relationship with Chertkov was homosexual in nature. She implied this in her diary and spoke her mind with Makovitsky and the writer’s secretary, Bulgakov. Because of Tolstoy’s moral authority, her allegations were dismissed.
>Chertkov convinced Tolstoy to sign a secret will and give control of his works to Chertkov instead of Sophia. He then used this control to publish versions of Tolstoy's collected works as he wanted. He also criticized Sophia, discredited her diaries and her own writing, and played up his own relationship with the Count. Chertkov also fostered a positive relationship with the newly formed Soviet state, which he used to suppress Sophia's version of Tolstoy's life story and his relationship with her.
Are you TeamChertkov or TeamSophia?

How much should someone read a day to become an intellectual? I was thinking 100 pages a day, but maybe its more like 200+? What do you guys think. Not counting dumb useless fiction of course.

>>16432013
>Furthermore, as it has been argued by Putnam, indeterminism is equally incompatible with free will.
This is BTW exactly what I asked. I didn't think there were reasons to doubt free will that are unrelated to determinism. Do you care to share a link or point me where I could find his argument against free will that doesn't assume determinism?
However, I highly doubt that he has a good argument, because if there were a good argument that didn't assume determinism then it seems it should be a lot more popular, while in fact I've viewed many videos about free will and read many posts about free will on /lit/ and the only arguments were crucially dependent on the assumption of determinism (an assumption which I believe is unwarranted).

What is it about materialism that is so attractive to leftists?
Any books that explain the connection?

>>16397996
>>16397999
>>16398001
>>16398017
are god and the universe one and the same or is he a different entity

>>16365188
I’ve literally never saw anyone below the age of 40 reading or talking about books in my entire life. Most kids (and a lot of people in general) are too distracted by video games, YouTube, Netflix, their phones and the countless social media apps on them, or partying, taking drugs, alcohol, etc when they grow up. And honestly who could blame them, all of these things were specifically created and designed to appeal to and manipulate the most base parts of the human brain, so only extreme weirdo and the highly intelligent can transcend them, and everyone else is just fucked.

Most kids would probably think you’re weird or there’s something wrong with you if they saw you reading a book, especially a piece of classical literature, or non-fiction over 200 pages with a less than a 1/10 ratio of picture pages per actual pages.

I kind of got my 12 year old brother into reading, but he only pretends to read to impress me. He’s unironically basically illiterate, can’t read anything with more than two, or maybe three syllables. He’s not retarded or anything, that’s just the norm for kids nowadays. Mostly just plays Fortnite and GTA 5.

Parmenides hurt my brain, I couldn’t follow the argument even though it is literally just (statement) followed by an agreement or a request for clarification and then agreement.

>>16314070
>Paglia
>In 1993, Paglia signed a manifesto supporting NAMBLA, a pederasty and pedophilia advocacy organization.[80][81]
>noted in several interviews, as well as Sexual Personae, that she supports the legalization of certain forms of child pornography

>Kate Millet
>Millett added that "one of children's essential rights is to express themselves sexually, probably primarily with each other but with adults as well" and that "the sexual freedom of children is an important part of a sexual revolution ...

>(((Susan Gubar)))
>Her other writings include essays on the relationship between Judaism and feminism, and the role of poetry in Holocaust remembrance.[4]
A book mocking Jesus and christianity.

>Sandra Gilbert
>She has been a recipient of Guggenheim, Rockefeller, NEH, and Soros Foundation fellowships
>In 2004 she was awarded the degree of Doctor Philosophiae Honoris Causa by the Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Interdasting. So among the 4 feminists you mentioned, we got 2 that definitely expressed their support for pedophilia, a christian hating jew that wrote a book about relationship between Judas and feminism (lol), Guggenheim, Rockefeller, NEH, and Soros Foundation-approved philosemite who's best buddies with (((Gubbar))). 0 of these people have explicitly renounced pedophilia.

I'm not familiar with hitlerism or nazis but I came to hate jews for my own reasons. However, I'm a strong believer in objective truth and using arguments to find out the truth.
A lot of accusations against nazis and hitler was that they didn't care about the truth, that for them might is right, just like the sartreposter quote. This is also seen in Umberto Eco's definition of fascism
>3. "The Cult of Action for Action's Sake", which dictates that action is of value in itself, and should be taken without intellectual reflection. This, says Eco, is connected with anti-intellectualism and irrationalism, and often manifests in attacks on modern culture and science.
>4. "Disagreement Is Treason" – Fascism devalues intellectual discourse and critical reasoning as barriers to action, as well as out of fear that such analysis will expose the contradictions embodied in a syncretistic faith.
How accurate are these criticisms?

>find book I've wanted for months
>check introduction
>'btw this book is shit lmao'

What the fuck. Do I read it anyways?

btw it's Hauser's art history. Intro by Jonathan Harris

>>16240380

>right wing
>culture
>art

>>16204675
A pedantic point but you are mixing up cause and ground. The transcendental category of cause has its basis in the understanding, for the purpose of synthesizing the order of events in time. It does not make any sense to be employed to talk about anything outside of phenomena. Ground otoh has its basis in reason.

>Phenomena cannot be the cause of my experience, since their representation already requires an experience
Phenomena is experience, these two terms are interchangeable. That one representation already requires an earlier representation is an a priori requirement, this defect exists in the subject, you can't extend it to something outside the subject, e.g metaphysics. This is all covered in the antinomies, no?

>I cannot find it, do you have a link?
Search libgen for "Between Kant & Hegel: Texts in the Development of Post-Kantian Idealism", isbn 0872205045, translations by the excellent Giovanni & Harris

What if he said Baudrillard or Derrida

>>16072448
>caesar is a nazi

>>16072973
In the same vein: https://radicaluncertainty.com/2016/01/16/the-discontinuity/

I think you'll really like this.

>Another way to put this is to say that a wavelength of zero, where there are no ‘features’ to be seen, is akin to the situation where no statements are overtly made, but in which all possible statements are inherent. The silence that we are talking about here is not therefore impoverished, or lacking, but rather it is a like a ‘pregnant pause’ – it is like the Gnostic conception of the ‘fruitful womb of Eternity’, the ‘Pleroma’. If a particular statement is made (a particular rule) then this is all very good and it might look like a ‘step forward’, it might look like an act of creation, like as the positive act of creation whereby God created the world in Genesis, but from the Gnostic point of view this was not ‘creation’ at all but arbitrary limitation masquerading as creation since the particular positive statement can only stand as a particular positive statement if it implicitly denies the existence of any competing positive statements.

>>16064407
No.
>>16064415
Turkey is part of Europe and more European than a shithole like Russia.
>>16064423
Russian? In your dreams. I bet you eat your own shit and think it tastes good, that's how fucked your senses would have to be to like Russian.
>>16064424
Can't compete with Spanish.
>>16064897
>Russian
>Dutch
LMAO.
>>16065115
Based. Portuguese is a top-tier language.
>>16065490
Fuck you, pleb.
>>16065547
French/Greek is the best combo. Fuck Arabic, sounds like someone is choking on cock. Really gay language.
>>16065672
Based brasilmonkey bro.
>>16064398
The only good European language are Romance and Hellenic languages. In this order:
1. French.
2. Greek.
3. Italian.
4. Spanish.
5. Portuguese.
Honorable mentions to German and English, which despite being incredibly ugly, gay sounding and clearly inferior to Romance/Hellenic languages, have a sizable amount of literature.

Russia isn't European, so it doesn't count, but it's a trash language anyways. It sounds like garbage and it's a barbarian tongue for toothless peasants. The Nordic languages apart from English/German are irrelevant and just as ugly and gay. The other Slavic languages are just as disgusting as Russian. Turkish is superior to all Slavic languages and Nordic languages and I'm happy they're taking over Germany. Maybe Germany will be nice for once in its history. The semitic languages are vulgar and gross, which is why they had to switch to Greek to write the New Testament. Hebrew and Arabic just aren't fit for God's message/revelation.

Other good languages are Sanskrit and Farsi, but those are specialist languages and well, not European.

I really love the Chinese language, its aesthetic, the temperament of its wisdom traditions.

I also think the Chinese are murderous demonic insectoids from Antares slowly terraforming this planet into another one of their hives. How do I reconcile these two positions?

Nietzsche is important, then, not because he says completely new things about the human condition — as Sloterdijk points out, the call for man’s superelevation has been around since ancient times and forms a key component in the mission of Christianity — but because he raises the level of articulation in the process that Sloterdijk calls “anthropotechnic explication.” Nietzsche argued that we were experiments and urged us to want to become such. Indeed, in a note, which Sloterdijk likes to return to throughout the book, Nietzsche says he wants asceticism to become natural again and outlines a schema of a new “spiritual” life for humans.

the aesthetic dictates the value
the value dictates the reason
the reason dictates....

What are the hardest books you've ever read?

Extremely difficult philosophy - 4pg/day
Difficult philosophy - 10pg/day
Prose/rhetoric philosophy - 25pg/day
Difficult fiction - 10-25pg/day
Typical fiction - 50-100pg/day
Easy ficton - not sure but the last time I read something YA I read through it in a day and it was about 250pg, about six years ago.

I read 2 to 5 hours per day

I need some assistance in making a rhetorical analysis on an article that my professor force assigned me. here is the article: https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/is_social_media_driving_political_polarization