/lit/ - Literature

>>16726877
I know this is probably beyond the scope of what you were talking about, but it got me thinking. It'd be much easier for humans to figure out animal speech, than the other way around, because we are the ones able to build tools to communicate with them, in their ways. And once you have a writing system, you can have a written language, and you can start figuring out their vocabulary and grammar. It would be like trying to decipher hieroglyphics, sure, but at least we're dealing with live speakers, and not archaeological remains.

>>16436960
This post gets more and more based with each sentence. Returning not just to a feudal system, but to feudal society, may not be a bad idea. As >>16436883 puts it in another thread:

>Sure, today you have modern medicine and entertainment and technology, but medieval peasants had a lot of things we don't. They had better work hours, they had a better family unit, they had higher quality food, they had better gender roles, they didn't attack each other over politics, they didn't worry about the environment, they didn't worry about what was going on in other continents, or being demographically replaced, or hunting down a wife or husband. They had their own little world pretty much all they had to worry about were invaders or their kids dying from illness.

He may be romanticizing history, and the grass we've never seen with our eyes is the greenest, but he can't be wrong on every and each account.

>>16421589
>You're a fascist, you're clearly a misogynist, your characters are hollow and are transparently mouthpieces for philosophical positions you dislike.
>It's like you've never understood what gives other people their humanity. It's a solipsistic text.
He's telling you to be the next Ayn Rand, OP!