/lit/ - Literature

"You're just a speech bubble, inside your own head."

>>4869618
Indeed.

That woman is by nature intended to obey is shown by the fact that every woman who is placed in the unnatural position of absolute independence at once attaches herself to some kind of man, by whom she is controlled and governed; this is because she requires a master. If she, is young, the man is a lover; if she is old, a priest.

Has anyone read Schopenhauer? I think he's my favorite philosopher now. Not as smart as Kant but much more relatable and has awesome random insights he interjects all throughout his works

>>4744354
Yes, you should let three people die to minimise the amount of suffering in the world.

Where should I start with this man?

"And then again, there can be said to be three kinds of author.
Firstly, there are those who write without thinking . They write from memory, from reminiscence m or even directly from other peoples books. This calss is the most numerous. - Secondly, there are those who think while writing. They think in order to write.Very common. - Thirdly, there are those who have thought before they started writing. They write simply because they have thought.Rare. "

What one are you /lit/?

And for those who know the Philosophies of Schopenhauer and have read On reading and writing
>yfw all that complaining about shit authors

There must have been surely thousands of Stephenie Meyers,John Greens and Suzanne Collins

>>4707506

>>4664434
>Feminister

>Every miserable fool who has nothing at all of which he can be proud, adopts as a last resource pride in the nation to which he belongs; he is ready and happy to defend all its faults and follies tooth and nail, thus reimbursing himself for his own inferiority.

>>4595380

Hello OP

Where to start?

Oh, and I guess Schopenhauer thread.

>>4467831
Schopenhaur pls go

>>4292272
Nor can one expect anything else from women if one considers that the most eminent heads of the entire sex have proved incapable of a single truly great, genuine and original achievement in art, or indeed of creating anything at all of lasting value: this strikes one most forcibly in regard to painting, since they are just as capable of mastering its technique as we are, and indeed paint very busily, yet cannot point to a single great painting; the reason being precisely that they lack all objectivity of mind, which is what painting demands above all else. Isolated and partial exceptions do not alter the case: women, taken as a whole, are and remain thorough and incurable philistines: so that, with the extremely absurd arrangement by which they share the rank and title of their husband, they are a continual spur to his ignoble ambitions. They are sexus sequior, the inferior second sex in every respect: one should be indulgent toward their weaknesses, but to pay them honour is ridiculous beyond measure and demeans us even in their eyes.

In the future, all literature will be about the trivial.

We have a sophisticate functional body because nature is drastic - everything dysfunctional dies with no offspring.

The nonconformist and conflicting ones disapprove life and thus have no children.

The future belongs to the beautiful, intelligent and ruling and to stupid, ugly and obedient who don't not care being stupid, ugly and obedient.

The super elite and the low proletariat, each one happy in their place. The building blocks of society, masters and servants, will be finally accommodated.

All conflict will be gone, as well as all interesting literature.

fuck me, right?

>>4179664
>Am I enough of a curmudgeon yet? That's what makes you mature, right, guys? Right?

I 'm pretty sure Schopenhauer can drive just about anyone to suicide with enough conviction.


>That human life must be some kind of mistake is sufficiently proved by the simple observation that man is a compound of needs which are hard to satisfy; that their satisfaction achieves nothing but a painless condition in which he is only given over to boredom; and that boredom is a direct proof that existence is in itself valueless, for boredom is nothing other than the sensation of the emptiness of existence.

>We complain of the darkness in which we live out our lives; we do not understand the nature of existence in general; we especially do not know the relation of our own self to the rest of existence. Not only is our life short, our knowledge is limited entirely to it, since we can see neither back before our birth nor out beyond our death, so that our consciousness is as it were a lightning-flash momentarily illumination the night….

>"The conviction that the world, and therefore man too, is something which really ought not to exist is in fact calculated to instill in us indulgence towards one another; for what can be expected of beings placed in such a situation as we are?...the appropriate form of address between man and man ought to be, not monsieur, sir, but fellow sufferer, compagnon de miseres...reminds us of what are the most necessary of all things: tolerance, patience, forbearance and charity...

Schopenhauer!

Does the contemplation of aesthetics really alleviate suffering?

>>3958065
Hegel, stop posting you stupid charlatan.

>women suck
>jews are bad
>but blacks are cool
wait what

Can you guys recommend any philosophers/philosophical works that deal with art/defining art/aesthetics, etc.?

Need a good book on free will.
Someone here recommended me to read up on free will but I don't remember the name of the book, something like "The concept of free will"

I wanted to get into the philosophy behind misandry/misogyny. What are some key texts I should look into?