/lit/ - Literature

>>20709028
>>20709028
>nonfiction = stem
deflect harder, retard. even the other human sciences laugh at you. i will always prefer to read law, history, or philosophy over this buck-toothed faggot's shitty prose.
but i guess there's no point arguing with those that are blind to the obvious.

>Secondly, your theory gives you no reason to ascribe perfection to God even in his capacity as a finite being, or to suppose him to be free from every error, mistake, or incoherence in his activities. Consider the many inexplicable difficulties in the works of nature—·illnesses, earthquakes, floods, volcanoes, and so on·. If we think we can prove a priori that the world has a perfect creator, all these calamities become unproblematic: we can say that they only seem to us to be difficulties because we with our limited intellects can’t follow all the infinitely complex details of which they are a part. But according to your line of argument these difficulties are real; indeed they might be emphasized as new instances of the world’s likeness to the products of human skill and contrivance! You must, at least, admit that we with our limited knowledge can’t possibly tell whether this system contains any great faults, or deserves any considerable praise, when compared to other possible systems and perhaps even when compared to real ones.

Hume was 28 when he completed his A Treatise on Human Nature

This might be a selfish question outside the scope of this board -- but what youtube channel would you recommend dealing with Philosophy?

My take is that many of you do follow and enjoy debates where philosophies clash and develop.