/lit/ - Literature

Why do you guys think that literature is seen as better than TV shows or videogames? Usually people that read a lot are seen as smart or cultured while people that watch TV or play vidya as extremely lazy/dumb. Why is that? Don't you guys think that videogames or TV shows can be as good as books?

>>16964533
Time spent here is time spent reading so it would be impossible to spend more time on here than on reading.

>reading portrait of the artist
>”madam, I never eat muscatel grapes”
>i understand the reference to an adventure novel I read as a teenager
>mfw

Neo-Platonic Schopenhauerian Cartiasianist Duo McCarthyPynchonian Epictetan Pseudo Real Realism

Be honest /lit/, if someone offered you the power to write a piece of trash that sold millions and made you a millionaire, would you take it and have your name forever associated with a Twilight-tier book?

Or would you take option B, write a timeless masterpiece that only sells after you die poor?

There exists the non-being of all phenomena, forms and things.
Form is non-being and non-being is form. Non-being is not different from form and form is not different from non-being. Everything that is non-being is also form and everything that is form is also non-being.

>>15221741
So, like, couldn't an entity simply create a system with its own laws ? like physics and stuff... that represented the phenomenology aspect of said system, which in turn would transpire a series of events, by itself ?
So, in this universe, which would have been an autonomous system, we would exist, and we would evolve, and would create morals, i.e. good and evil, but being only a small fraction of this universe we could perceive only a fraction of it, therefore our perception would be faulty and biased, creating inherently defective morals, couldn't this be the case ?
But, being a big universe, some smart people eventually understand this default error and humbly recognize their own inability to create good enough moral compass, They could go even beyond and to say like "any morals that we create comes from our limited perceptions, therefore would be limited. It would be fair to say there are no good nor evil, only our perceptions of it."

>>15040413
he is completely and unequivocally correct, non-dualism is the ultimate truth

>>14667335
If you're in the middle of the road, you're gonna get run over. Intelligent people gravitate toward either liberation theology or traditionalism. Midwits do what you do, which is why you've used a facebook meme.

>>14648658
>tfw binge watching his videos

Karma is cope. Also a brainlet topic, a tit-for-tat for right and wrong. Big brains know that the insult of one bad action is infinite, and accordingly deserves infinite punishment. Karma is also motivated by revenge, which is ironic as none of the remedies ever to be alluded to as solution (LOL KARMA BITCH), are infinite, so they are practically nothing, a metaphysical slap on the wrist. The only thing that can make up for someone being a bad person is for them to feel true remorse and if they did, they would apologize for their actions. This is what Plato said 2400 years ago and it is STILL true today.

I will be on vacation, but at a relative's house where I'll be confined to my bedroom for most of the day. Which would you recommend I bring?
>Borges Collected Fictions, I read Ficciones twice but none of his other fiction
>The Brothers Karamazov, 300 pages in but stopped and i know the entire plot already
>Divine Comedy, never read it
>KJV bible, never read it
>Moby Dick, 200 pages in and stopped for no reason but i loved it
>The Guermantes Way, 1/6 the way in but seems not what I looked for in Proust
>Notes from Underground, never read it
>Anna Karenina, 300 pages in but stopped because got sick of it

>>14469650
iktf when im in maintenance/surplus its easy but at a deficit i lose focus

>>14466994
I'm with him. I pick both.

Their feet swift to shed blood:

Destruction and misery in their ways:

And the way of peace they have not known.

There is no fear of God before their eyes.

>the collected works of Plato are only some 1800 pages
>when you realize it IS possible to read all of philosophy

Herein lies the annoyingly persistent logical error of those physicists (like Alexander Vilenkin, Victor Stenger, or Lawrence Krauss) who claim that physics has now discovered how the universe can have spontaneously arisen from “nothingness,” without divine assistance. It does not really matter whether the theoretical models they propose may one day prove to be correct. Without exception, what they are actually talking about is merely the formation of our universe by way of a transition from one physical state to another, one manner of existence to another, but certainly not the spontaneous arising of existence from nonexistence (which is logically impossible). They often produce perfectly delightful books on the subject, I hasten to add, considered simply as tours of the latest developments in speculative cosmology; but as interventions in philosophical debates those books are quite simply irrelevant. As a matter of purely intellectual interest, it would be wonderful some day to know whether the universe was generated out of quantum fluctuation, belongs either to an infinite “ekpyrotic” succession of universes caused by colliding branes or to a “conformally cyclic” succession of bounded aeons, is the result of inflationary quantum tunneling out of a much smaller universe, arose locally out of a multiverse in either limited constant or eternal chaotic inflation, or what have you. As a matter strictly of ontology, however, none of these theories is of any consequence, because no purely physical cosmology has any bearing whatsoever upon the question of existence (though one or two such cosmologies might point in its direction). Again, the “distance” between being and nonbeing is qualitatively infinite, and so it is immaterial here how small, simple, vacuous, or impalpably indeterminate a physical state or event is: it is still infinitely removed from nonbeing and infinitely incapable of having created itself out of nothing. That the physical reality we know is the result of other physical realities has more or less been the assumption of most human cultures throughout history; but that, unfortunately, casts no light whatsoever on why it is that physical reality, being intrinsically contingent, should exist at all.

>>14337051
The world neither is nor isn't

>>14241149
because its not, we are all big brains

>>13908975
>mfw infinite regress

>>13869911

https://realization.org/p/ashtavakra-gita/richards.ashtavakra-gita/richards.ashtavakra-gita.html

>>13816006
Why would you write? All the best stuff has already been written. I only read.

>never write anything
>story stays as a perfect idea forever, no editing required