/lit/ - Literature

>>22706700
>>22706762
>>22707214
>caliphate was suppoed to be elected as the best ruler amongst all the learned people in like a semi democratic manner and be both the ruler militaryily and economically of all muslim people but also the spirtual head, not spirutally better than you but still like a hyper good theologian

>only really lasted until the 5th caliphate where then it became a monarchy system instead

this is basic fucking knowledge OP, holy shit do basic research

>>20725660
>No one here reads my webnovel
>No one here follows my twitter nor my gettr
>No one listens to the unreal press podcast
>No one from the unreal bros nor neo-/lit/ has volunteered me
>I literally talk with these authors on discord and they never bring me up
>I've published two books and no one here knows because I don't self-shill

>>19138567
I want to feel this woman's soft body pressed against mine. I want to feel the gentle undulations of her breathing as she lays on top of me asleep. I want to pet her head as she cries softly into my chest. I want to see her face light up when I surprise her by coming home from work early.

Anons who are 30+, I'll turn 30 in a couple of years and I have some questions for you. What did you regret about your 20s? What are some tips for these last "hoorah" years I still have left? Thanks.

>>17076922
So this board is for the already decayed who didn't live their dreams? Guess I'll show myself out, then. See you guys tomorrow.

I've found that devs who think games are art make significantly worse game than devs who don't care.

>>16737659
I'm the guy who wrote those posts and I don't understand the nature of your conflict. Yes, I was stating some facts because I want to establish that Foucault's analysis of disciplinary societies cannot be extended to the relations of power created by Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Youtube, Whatsapp, etc. The original poster was trying to say that a) idpol leftists subscribe to Foucault's ideas; b) that cancel culture is a corollary o "a"; and, c) cancel culture is a form of disciplinary power, meaning idpols are in contradiction. I just tried to show that OP's argument is completely bogus in two ways. The first is that idpolsters are not acting the way they do because of Foucault, that's just a stupid assumption and it really makes no sense. The second is that even if one were to criticize cancel culture, they would find the ideas in "Discipline & Punish" severely lacking in explanatory power. In that book he is always talking about how before the Enlightenment bodily punishment and other forms of violence were enacted in order to keep people in place, but that it had changed after the industrial revolution, when such type of torture/punishment became obsolete not simply because of "muh human rights", but because capital found a more efficient way of controlling people. So they started controlling production, education, democracy, etc. You were under constant vigilance, you had time tables to follow, certain techniques to be acquired and employed in a certain order, police patrolled the streets more extensively, etc. It is a very good analysis, but not when it comes to our digital lives. Look at tendencies in the work place (specially of cutting edge industries): work using whatever clothes you want, achieve your tasks by any means, flexible hours, take a break whenever you wish to do, play ping pong, work from home a couple of days every week... The paradox is this greater "freedom" (meaning, lack of disciplinary control) actually leads to people self-regulate even more severely than before. Now the individual himself has to be both supervisor and supervised. There's no master behind cancel culture, no guard behind the panopticon.

>>16626923
Good, then. Hope you make the best of it. I have nothing against rich leeches studying the humanities, good for you. It's just bad manners to lead a poor/lower middle class person to waste their time and energy in a liberal arts college.

>>16610523
Heidegger was trying to get philosophy back to basics, and for him that meant the study of Being. He was mainly trying to show that philosophy (all the way from Plato/Aristotle) had gone off track by focusing on consciousness, epistemology and the subject/object distinction. Aristotle had fucked up big time when he brought up the notion of substance, something like the metaphysical substract of the universe. Heidegger said the only worthwhile subject worth of study, because it's the most basic, is Being, because it's pressupposed in everything.

What is Being? A cheeky answer: the opposite of Nothing, of no-thing. You'll receive a million definitions depending to whom you ask. What is important about Being is that you (an example of Dasein, a being-in-the world) cannot escape Being, you cannot try to see yourself as a subject and other beings as subjects, both Dasein and other beings are into Being. You're thrown in the world and you relate to the world immersed in Being.

He argued that philosophers had failed to recognize this, and tried to show how scientific endeavours or propositional knowledge are only one way in which Being manifests itself, but this type of knowledge is only concerned with the ontic (as opposed to the ontological). It also alienates you from Being, because you start treating other beings as inferior, you try to categorize and see them as objects. By way of scientific inquiry you, Dasein, become unable to act as a Being-towards-death (a notion completely lifted up from Kierkegaard, for which he gives no fucking source in the text, and yes, I MAD, because Fear and Trembling is a great 'lil book).

I'm now getting completely fucking off track, because I see that I'll need to introduce his conception of World, of everydayness, of "ready at hand" and merely "present at hand", how Time is a fundamental property of Dasein, that we're all immersed in Meaning (Bedeutung). I'd have to tell you about how your relation to non-Dasein beings is on par with your relation to other Dasein. It's a complete fucking shitshow of new words and this immense edifice of words, words, and words.

I'm getting mad just thinking about it. I'm sorry, Anon, but I can't even type this shit without feeling bad for myself. Some of the stuff is good to read, like when he talks about our relationship to tools and everydayness, but most of it has been said more beautifully, more compellingly, less abtrusely by poets and novelists. At heart, Heidegger has a fucking agenda and he wastes your time with it. Making the effort to read Heidegger is the biggest mistake a Dasein can make during the course of his finite being-in-the-world.

>>16580597
FUCK

>>14136002
>>14136001
>>14136511
>>14136520

i think its safe to say, this was a poorly made poll
>DELET THIS

>mfw I've accepted my fate as kissless virgin

>>14020107

Is it possible that the phenomenon of hyper-politization of society (coming from the left and right wings) is tied to wagecuckery? 95% of people have meaningless jobs where they mostly follow orders and simply toil to either a) sell a product; b) design a product; c) assemble a product; d) perform accessory tasks that make product-making possible (think of janitors and such). Despite being bombarded by advertisement and being exhorted to consume and "live life to the fullest", wagecuckery denies most people from ever doing anything. They do not get anything out of their daily 12h life tax and the only way they think they can matter is by taking political stances and acting like the high priests of morals. What do you think?

>>13542802
>half-Japanese boy genius Gary Stu self-insert
Imagine editing this.

IM SO SEXUALLY FRUSTRATED AND LONELY AND AAAAAAHHHH
WHAT BOOK SHOULD I READ TO CALM DOWN?

>tfw no /lit/ gf who also likes obscure horror movies