/lit/ - Literature

>>23089999
>God the smugness is unbearable. Just take a whiff of your shit already

>no essay today, just looking to explore the subject
It dawned on me that "Commercial English" language is what we're all experiencing as the busted-lip 'tard manner of thought, speech and writing in the Anglophone cultural sphere; the public relations agent or propagandist repeating simplistic non-sequitur, the idiot who reads one line and only reads to find a refutation, functional illiteracy, poor speech and reasoning skills overall, purposefully simplistic speech and narratives in stories etc., or even the 'approach' they take to reading or listening where they think they're a consumer looking for entertained, etc. etc. etc., it all falls under Commercial English: the great dumbing down and its constant reinforcement via so many sources. We're even 'educated' to write in this manner, for the sake of "mass consumption" of whatever we write.

Look at you, for example, you're thinking "what's the USP of this text? What's the hook? How do I gratify myself from this?" if the USP is unclear baby will turn tantrum red and bash its fisties upon its plastic feed tray, calling for "ma ma," whilst the notion of simply exploring ideas; even as like a high class consumer walking around in an exclusive place, even this does not readily come to you because you're so used to reading like taking up a Twinky and gripping it tight until it squirts into your face and of the finer writers we too have developed the habit of enabling this: of preparing gourmet meals, standing back and admiring the dinner table, and then going at it with a hammer, mashing it all up, then scraping the remnants into a plastic bag to be jizzed across the face.

Is it stupidity or some form of cunning which merely produces stupidty?

>In the year 155 BC, when he was fifty-eight years old, he was chosen with the Stoic Diogenes of Babylon and the Peripatetic Critolaus to go as ambassadors to Rome to deprecate the fine of 500 talents which had been imposed on the Athenians for the destruction of Oropus. During his stay at Rome, he attracted great notice from his eloquent speeches on philosophical subjects. It was here that, in the presence of Cato the Elder, he delivered his several orations on justice. The first oration was in commendation of the virtue of Roman justice. The next day he delivered the second oration, in which he refuted all the arguments he had made the day before. He persuasively attempted to prove that justice was inevitably problematic, and not a given when it came to virtue, but merely a compact device deemed necessary for the maintenance of a well-ordered society.

>Cato moved the Roman Senate to send Carneades back to Athens

>>22066253
You are't free if you can't read or think properly or handle your alcohol; the word and concept of liberty is inherently tied to the concept of being an intellectual capable of rational and discerning autonomy.

>>22066261
good point.

>>22066254
judeo-christian values.

THE MONSTROSITY OF “PLATOS CAVE” : THE INTERNET AND PRECEDENTS IN TELEVISION (BRAIN DAMAGE AS BY-PRODUCT OF FALSE-REALITY COERCION, AND THE REPEATED SHREDDING OF ‘SENSES OF REALITY’ AS “FADISM” AMONGST CHILDREN SEEKING TRIBALISM

[nb. I suppose this text can be cannibalized for various on-going books on the same subject]

The nature of the ‘Moderator’ we have explored already; as to the person who holds and controls the denizen of the “internet,” but there is so much more to this subject than a cliché classical narrative of a person of otherwise good and rational sense who is being held against their will and who would break free if only given an opportunity. We are, I think, around twenty or so years into the “internet as we know it (i mean the contemporary times)” and the psychological damage which has occurred to those exposed to it cannot be understated; indeed, they were damaged in the first place, now they are far more damaged. The real precedent, I think, is that of Television back when Television was somewhat at its apex in the 60’s to 80’s; people with no lives to speak of would go to Television to escape the dreary monotony of their own personal world and the manner in which they were shaped by what they were exposed to is no greater or lesser than that of the same process which occurred via the Internet. Even the “fake commentary” (i mean the heavily censored and therefore entirely ‘false’ sense of ‘what is the public opinion’, see: Twitter, Reddit, etc.) is no moreso than “canned laughter” and “camera sweeps” of a happy or sad or vexed “studio audience” being inserted into a picture to elicit the same response in the actual observer of the picture; the psychological mechanism and its utility is self-evident in application and ease of use. We might say that it is ‘this’ mechanic by which both operations were all the time depending upon, that is: one is presented with a false perception of “audience reaction” tailored to elicit whatsoever reaction in the actual observer; constructing an artificial presentation of ‘tribe response’, and that this false perception is the primary or even singular and sole method by which the coercion takes place at large; this is a highly simplistic thing, of course, to alter a picture or, if in News-Journalism some event, to be taken in whatsoever way one wishes by presenting a reaction to it to the observer who seems by some psychological flaw to derive their own reaction based upon the reaction given to them.

1/5

*bit of a long one this morning for you, reader, like my cock ha ha

>>21228996
hahahaha well, what're you coming from solipsism or something? "it doesn't matter if writing about the merits of Hitler will be taken badly (to mean something I was not writing about at all) by 100% of the people who read it, I will write it anyway," well ... okay then, good luck with that. It won't work out well for you at all, obviously.

Nah, I'm not going to believe what you're saying here, it feels like you just want to voice these opinions, which aren't overly incorrect in their principle. As I said though, if we know XYZ will occur, then why would you even bother? Tecnically speaking you'd be the only living person to do a favor to a group of people you otherwise didn't care for, and maybe one other guy will appreciate that you noticed the fine paint-mixing skills on behalf of painter Hitler w/ the moral endorsement for Neo-Nazism being just a coincidence on your part, cos really you were writing as a paint-mixing expert. or something.

>We already settled that you're a dumb person who thinks he's smart
LE DUNNING-KREEUKKKERR IS STRUNK VIS ZIZ VUN

>>19796202
>They know Plato is pure copium but they need his illusion in order to avoid suicide. Hence the angry reactions when someone dares to question their incel fantasy.

>>18987659
>I understand Taoism better than the Chinese people who have practiced it for thousands of years and the priests and monks who have devoted their entire lives to it
>Fuck meditation and ritual, mysticism should just be mental masturbation

>>18558182
>However, without a complete and deliberate, logical analysis of important works, going into semantics and propositions, arguments and their consequences, we can't fully comprehend a work.
Dumbest thing I’ve ever fucking read on this website
> to completely and without any possible holes understand a work
What does this even mean? What would this even look like? Pearce could write out Kant’s CPR from memory; is that what we have to do?

>>17840972
>yOu DoN't UnDeRsTaNd
>sEe, I wAs JuSt sAyInG tHaT i CaN't InTeRpReT pLaTo wItHoUt ToTaLlY dEfErRiNg To NeOpLaToNiStS wHo ReAd HiM iN a WaY tHaT nOt EvEn PeOpLe WhO kNeW hIm LiKe SpEuSiPpUs, ArIsToTlE, oR tHeOpHrAsTuS wOuLd ReCoGnIzE aS lEgItImAtE
>nOw Do YoU uNdErStAnD?

>>17704594
>If a book isn’t literally on fire, it’s not being censored

>>17476920
>Anybody feel like culture is really boring at the moment?
Culture is literally the most interesting its ever been. Massive corruption, massive polarization and unrest, every commercial, article, and product is partial or all propaganda. And ALL OF IT flies under the radar of the average person.
>There is no sense of genuine rebellion or "edge", except for attacking whitey.
Did it ever occur to you that the people 'attacking whitey' are all the major mainstream media outlets, Banks, Big corporations, Universities, and leftist activist groups? Doesn't that seem off to you? The rebellion or edge might be, just MAYBE defending whitey. What a crazy idea.

>>17362191
>There is reddit and anti-reddit, but both are reddit nonetheless, if you do not transcend the existence of reddit itself you are reddit.

>>17085088
>MBTI isn’t real
>now post some INFPcore literature