/lit/ - Literature

>>22312956
>The enemy today is what I call onions globalism.

>The globalists’ aim is to destroy nations and local communities. To do this, they isolate and sicken the individual, especially through food, so-called medicine and all of the harmful chemicals we’re exposed to on a daily basis. The globalists want you to be fat, sick, depressed and isolated, the better to control you and to milk you of as much economic value as they can before they kill you.

>That's the Great Reset.

>In a Nutshell: Own nothing, live in the pod, eat the onions.

>Well, the best response to this, as Trump showed, is a strong politics of nationalism. But the nation is only as strong as the individuals who make it up.

>So that’s where the raw eggs come in.

>>21705764
>having a normalfag life like everyone else in recorded history is "anti-human"
Incredible.

>>20327356
>Either way, I have more empathy for prostitutes. Giant wheezing fat man and you're just praying to god he just fucking finishes already.

THAT FACE LMFAOOO

>>15763011
>I don't agree with the political standpoint of this piece

>>13171207
>Nussbaum
>Nietzschean Stirnerite

>>13106615
>philosophy on suicide

>>12716991
based as fuck

>ITT redditor Hitchens worshippers get ahniliated
Glorious

Woahdeen bay craah!

>REEE Science has assumptions behind it, it is part of philosophy!
>Ok Humanitiesfag, I agree. But in the absence of empirical verification or pure deduction, why should I care about your philosophical system over another one? Or even over a 5 year old's system?
>REEEEE SHUTUP SHUTUP SHUTUP! NEVER QUESTION ACADEMIC FASHIONS! REEE
>Sorry to have hurt your feelings Humanitiesfag, I am truly sorry. Let me ask you another question. Why do you use currently accepted science as a platform for your own unfalsifiable extrapolations while saying you don't accept the importance of scientific method and observation? You implicitly are, when you use the latest Physics results as a platform for your own musings, though if you want a lesson on Quantum Mechanics, I'd be happy to help. You clearly misuse it. Obviously you can be sceptical of the scientific method and observation, they can ultimately never be "proven to be the true reality" but they have given us results that accord with the standards of sensory data, which we humans find important in everyday life.
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEE! I DON'T NEED ADVICE FROM BIRDS TO BE A PHILOSOPHERS OF BIRDS! STOP ASKING QUESTIONS! MY DIALECTIC EXPLAINS THE RUMINATIONS OF LATE CAPITALISM, JUST DON'T ASK ME TO PREDICT ANYTHKNG! REEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twZzTTzj4H4

Why are philosophers so useless and stupid whenever they try to tackle anything outside of academia?

https://twitter.com/elonmusk

I would post a pic of a specific tweet but there are multiple.

Greatest bait I've seen this year

> One final note: none of the positive or hopeful things that I said about philosophy apply to the postmodern or Continental kinds. As far as I can tell, the latter aren’t really “philosophy” at all, but more like pretentious brands of performance art that fancy themselves politically subversive, even as they cultivate deliberate obscurity and draw mostly on the insights of Hitler and Stalin apologists.

https://intelligence.org/2013/12/13/aaronson/

>>11167489

Wow, if you're in that position you must be low IQ, uncultured, and badly educated!

Imagine you seeing OP in the street. Imagine the GENETIC differences between him and you

>>11147775

There was that topic a short while ago about the Berkely guy who finds his CS classes hard and wants to focus more on English. Is there anything more embarrassing and frauduent today than the idea of a "literary intellectual"?

Many humanities types are fraudulent as well but they come to the intellectual battle with glass weapons that shatter soon enough while the literary and continental philosophies intellectuals tripped over their shoelaces that morning and hit their heads on concrete. They are such non-contenders. And I don't mean non contender in a way that means they're above it all.

Is there any more pathetic sight than a /lit/izen who sucks the dick of corporate publishers stuffed (unbeknownst to the ignorant /lit/izen, who is probably a Midwesterner / Poortherner) with Ivy League / Oxbridge, Hillary / New Labour supporting, milquetoast, Twitter virtue signallers (who he would be insulting on /lit/) while he talks of "artistic taste" and "his hopes of being a famous writer" and is completely unaware of his situation?

In any artistic medium, gatekeepers are not necessary for judging the quality of a work and figuring out whether someone can enjoy it. That can be done by through each person by themselves, through their own judgement. The theory that everyone has the same artistic tastes seems remote and, judging by the real world, it doesn't seem to be the case.

Of course, there is also the idea that a higher intelligence and higher level of literary study causes people to converge on the "objective taste in literature", the magical ability to judge books based on their "objective quality", a type of quality that exists out in the ether and can conveniently be grasped through chopping down a tree, turning it in to paper, spattering some ink on it, then reading the symbols on the page! Who knew that lumberjacks had these mystical powers!

Of course, the existence of this objective quality can't be proven or disproved. And conveniently for the people heavily invested in this idea of objective literary quality, such as academics, publishers who try to sell you certain books, or snivelling, glasses wearing, weedy 16 - 34 year old males, the study of literature and requires a lot of dues for the beginner. Money spent on certain books, and certain university courses, deferring to the weedy people more knowledgeable about which of Dostoevsky's novels best represent the metaphysics of Tsarist Russia, and so on. If I was slightly more cynical, I would say this "objective literary quality" social pressure was promoted by people who want to benefit financially and socially without the inconvenience and risks related to making something people can enjoy without being told to!

Are antidepressants taken by people who are too ignorant to realise they're having an existential crisis?

Isn't it cute how all the religious people band together these days? They know they fucking irrelevant and ridiculed and also their religions are mostly spineless and change with the times.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Here_is_one_hand

Woah.... So THIS is the power of Western philosophical thought... How does STEM compete?

>there are people in this day and age who still take Rand and the Austrians seriously, believeing the are on the side of economics nonetheless

>complex

THE

STATE
T
A
T
E

OF YOU