/lit/ - Literature

>>2016905
You, sir, have no idea how logic works.

The quality of a table depends on its usefulness. If it falls into pieces when you put stuff on it, it's completely useless. If it doesn't, you may put much stuff on it and the more you can put stuff on it, the more it's useful.

The quality of a diet depends on its impact on your health. Something that will get you fat and ill (which you probably are) is considered "bad" and something that keeps you healthy is considered "good".

Now, about music: being more virtuous and masterful does not equal being better. I for one have played the piano for many years and I've learned to play a shitload of pieces, some of them were easy as hell and some of them were really difficult and time consuming. When I played in front of people, their reactions were very different: I happened to perform some really hard pieces and people were like "cool, you're good", and some easy ones and people were like "my god... it's beautiful". Do you see the difference? If there are standards regarding the virtuousness of a piece of music, it doesn't mean that piece of music is better. It just tell how hard it is to play, and how skilled is the musician playing it.

>>1938510
>>1938501
>>1938486
>>1936295

>i am so edgy and have so cool intellectual tastes!!!

Why do the pretentious pseudo-intellectuals on /lit/ get so mad when people like sci-fi or fantasy? Why do they think their tastes are better? I don't care if you don't like these kinds of literature, just don't spout your nerd rage all over this place, that's useless. And yes, Phillip K. Dick, Asimov, Clarke, King, Wells, Tolkien, Herbert are literature writers. Deal with it, nerdos.

Pic related, this is what you look like when you rage at us.