/lit/ - Literature

>>17889137
>it's ANOTHER "retard goes to Barnes & Noble and is so shocked to find out it's complete garbage that he absolutely HAS to write an epic memetext about the experience" thread
Enough.

>>17329556
I've noticed that a lot of what passes for "anti-elitism" is really just cultural gatekeeping from below. If someone expresses an interest in classic literature, or anything else that's considered too "highbrow" or "difficult," they're either accused of being pretentious or met with passive aggressive arguments along the lines of "I'd rather just read for fun, it's totally okay to read YA fiction if you want, I'm not really impressed by people who read difficult books." It's discouragement, plain and simple, and it's usually directed at young people who are taking their first steps into the world of literature. For every pretentious teenager out there, there seem to be at least two other people whose sole purpose in life is to bash down anyone they think is reaching too high. At least the pretentious kids tend to mellow out and develop more perspective as they grow up. I'd rather tolerate teenage show-offs than live in a world where nobody reads anything more complicated than The Hunger Games.

Where are the parts in Kants moral philosophy where he says the hghest moral decision one can amke is the one that is more destiny and seems more of an accepting rather than a choice?

Like trannies should make the moral decision to be who they are and what they are, which doesnt include being dressing like a girl, changing how you talk or worse taking meds and cutting your tits off.

>>13185887
>It’s not futile. It’s only futile to those that accept it as such. Don’t do that.
Correct, here we can refer to a general critique of psychologism.
>Le pretend there is a god man
The question of God's existence is entirely irrelevant to our philosophical method. Rather, I would find it insulting, dare I say heretical, for a higher being to be devalued.

>>13063133
>Disgusting tattoos
>White woman

Alright /lit/, I had trouble deciding If I want this to be posted here or /his/ but I suppose this will suffice. How many of you actually work in some kind of field involving literature? Whether it be a teacher, prof or librarian. I am studying to complete my four year bachelor in a field that qualifies me for library science in a somewhat respectable state college in my area (I want to be a university/local librarian) The four year is doable in regards to tuition but the masters I remain ignorant of, I very well may apply in a for a student visa and got to Germany to get my masters. Also

>inb4 work trades libcuckkkk
Already do, it sucks

pic always related.

>>12971540
DON'T

>>12941205
Right, but wrong picture, friend.

Its about people who don't want to suffer because they were born unlucky but they should since it makes others feel good. Maybe its some kind of a sadism subgenre, or an epic(all depends on the viewer), I have hard time myself categorizing. Preferable if its contemporary. The best example I can give is the "incel" or virgin phenomenon.

>>12507917
You are not asexual and thus cannot be asexual.
There is no such thing as asexuality. All neurologically healthy men are sexual, the default position is heterosexuality. All things outside of it are perversions.

The practice of abstinence is referred to as continence and chastity, where someone decides to eschew their sexual whims in the pursuit of something greater. This is possible and exists and is capable of being practiced by anyone with self-control and a moderately high IQ. These are NOT synonyms for asexuality.

The meme is cringeworthy and contradictory. It defeats the very worldview you try to emulate. Let us analyze it, shall we?
>Looking away during sex scenes
If you were truly asexual, you would NOT need to look away from sex scenes because it would not cause arousal. It does, so you do. Your premise, and solution are faulty.

>so you're like a plant or something
>quit making shit up and find a girlfriend
>cringe text dialog
This is making "asexuality", identity rather than a means to an end, which is completely useless. You experience frustration because it is irrational.

Asexuality is a topic peddled by LGBTQ+ individuals to confused teenagers to try to co-opt them under their umbrella, as some sort of unique identity to pick and choose from, while at the same time itself affirms to be a sex-positive ideology.

>normies are slaves to their genitals, I am clear superior, how god I'm so alone
You act superior yet cannot find answers to your own question. Your asexuality is untenable and irrational, and as much as I hate to borrow from Freud, this is a superiority complex in its truest sense.

>no reason boner
This does not occur in the absence of arousal. It is occurring on some subconscious level for it to unfold. Again evidence that you are not even practicing sexual abstinence mentally, let alone are "asexual".

I advocate sexual abstinence/continence for productivity and peace of mind. Asexuality shows a fundamental misunderstanding and a total denial of human biology.

I don't believe in God.

I see the the fundamental disconnect between sexual activity and intellectual pursuits.
You're throwing away the only recent adaptation humans have the moment you engage in sexual activity, even the moment arousal occurs!, and undermine reason's control of the passions making you a slave and but a passenger in this ride in life with little agency over it. This is why most people are mediocre and losers and abandon their dreams, and are pathetic slaves to multitude of competing whims and urges. I am infinitely less productive when sexually active, plagued by constant horniness even at 3 sexual releases a day, and never endeavor to read in so much as a single page without forcing myself to with discipline—a worthless sack of shit like every other human out there. Abstinence confers remarkable productivity, and if practiced mentally, and one deliberately avoids sexual stimuli, they will paradoxically find themselves less aroused, less horny, and have a clean mind to work with. It is like being on a CNS stimulant, and the mind is elevated to better pursuits, where there is a constant well of motivation to not only do a task but to enjoy doing it.

All the brainlets in this thread defending sexual activity presuppose religious motivations but are the ones that sound religious themselves, thinking the sexual organs and activity from their use are infallible and a biological free lunch, an absurd premise. They are willfully ignorant because if they would explore the underpinnings of the human body, they would realize that they with every single indulgence, they've reinforced among the most primal regions of their brain, worse, a region able to induce hypfrontality to hijack control of your very self to ensure that what your evolutionary programming thinks is procreation; ruined their more recent faculties by directing them toward, and polluting them with, endless sexual experiences; destroyed their motivation and capacity for other tasks making them prone to incessant sexual distractions— all to no end, it's never satisfied more than a half hour, and only grows stronger with every single instance. Nothing is accomplished. Nothing is created. You think you're the one fucking or pretending to anyways when masturbating, but what's truly being fucked here is the most powerful instrument in the known universe, the human brain, your very mind (!), reduced to nothing more than that of a a stupid ape exploiting some primal programming to extract pleasure out of it, which once reinforced, directs you rather than you it. You throw away the only unique developments that separate us from the animals and tragically ruin them by reducing these faculties as means to sexual ends. Instead of trying to get to the next level, to be more than human, you decide to waste your one life by emulating animals.

>>12409118
*ahem*

>>12389339
>I don't see what makes them so important.
Read it again, Dogmatist.

>>12382756
>move on from Kant
>implying one is ever ready to move on from Kant