/lit/ - Literature

Why do branilets and midwits still say that slippery slope is a fallacy when it had been proven right countless times throughout history? Do these dipshits not understand the idea of incrementalism and boiling the frog?

>anglofags using vulgar russian language
Don't do this, you don't understand the weight of those words.
Russian swear words are extremely vulgar and are only used by the most disgusting lowlife scum.

>hard SF

>want to read relatively obscure work by a major author which is not featured in any of the paperback selected editions of said author
>okay, I'll just buy the author's complete works
>costs >$1000
Why do publishers do this?

>>11379499

>Evola is based because he didn't run away, never mind that he got a bunch of stuff wrong, wasn't initiated into any genuine tradition and was like a slightly edgier Blavatsky
>All those traditionalists who partook in live metaphysical traditions are nihilists or cowards because they wouldn't be BASED CHRISTIANS (except for Evola who was based even though he shat all over Christianity (totally not a contradiction btw))
>If only all these thots and kikes would recognize REAL TRADITIONS like ESOTERIC KUNDALINI HITLERISM
>fuck guenon for becoming a muslim, fucking mudslimes

>not purposefully reading bad translations so you can defeat them by truly understanding the book

It's like you guys aren't even trying to score extra reading-points

>>11173643
I like Fantano but he is has no clue what he's talking about here. Neither of his two interpretations of Peterson's comment are correct. Peterson uses "God" as a stand-in for "Belief in Transcendent Value." Jordan isn't talking about the institution of religion. He isn't talking about a belief in a literal god. He is simply pointing out that without a belief in an objective hierarchy of aesthetic values, art is impossible because it then becomes no different from anything else. There becomes no separation between good art and bad art, or art and inanimate objects. Peterson's definition of "God" is far more useful then the two-dimensional caricature that atheists like Fantano picture in their heads.

Seriously what's the point of them in a story? What exactly do they add? The protagonist has to go through all the challenges to grow and defeat the villain anyway. How does saying "Oh it was all prophesied" add anything to the story besides making it harder to identify with the character?

>>11044359
>>11045070
>>11045255
>>11045424
I understand why the age gap of the characters can seem off putting at first. But look at it this way: When you were 17 and a gorgeous 25 year old woman came onto you, would you have refused? Would you have been traumatized? Obviously not, in fact thats every 17 year old straight dudes dream.

Speaking from experience, I would have given my left nut to bang Armie Hammer when I was 17 and would remember it fondly forever. Stop trying to politicize everything so hard.

>>11045091
>>11045335
>>11045411
>>11045451
You're actually correct. The vocal minority of "LGBT" people are trying to normalize public degeneracy, the death of masculinity, and the dissolution of common value systems. I only ask that you remember that reasonable gay people exist who just want a private love life and some relate-able media sometimes. What do you think of Peter Thiel? or Douglas Murray? Alan Turing?

>>11045103
>we are biologically wired to be homophobic
Unless you're gay, in which case you're biologically wired to like men. You can pretend its conditioning if it makes you feel better but none of the science backs up that idea. Did you choose to find women beautiful? Were you conditioned? If you woke up one day in a world of homosexuals, could you develop an attraction to men to stay accepted socially?

Its funny how a lot of conservatives completely reject the "blank-slate" postmodern idea of social conditioning....unless of course it conveniently explains away the validity of homosexuality as a biological reality.

>using symbols to represent ideas or things

>>10221119
>XXDD POOPOO PEEPEE GAY JESUS AM I ~~SHOCKING~~ AND ~~ORIGINAL~~ ENOUGH YET XDDD

>>10077328
>Kino
This is the literature board, anon.

>mom found the dream diary
>now winks at me when we pass in the hallway

>>9457880

>can't come up with a pen name
>wants to be a writer

What comes after these two? The Start With the Greeks chart is trash.

Do I check out some Greek philosophy or what?

>When I wake up /fitlit/ shall be no more

>it's a "Cervantes takes a whole chapter to shit talk literature he doesn't like and praise literature he does like" episode

>people giving the Bible 1 star reviews on goodreads thinking they're clever
For what purpose

>>8739858
>reading books purely to reinforce your worldview

How is Sisyphus happy? He still has to push that fucking boulder up that hill everyday

>have nothing interesting going on in your life to write about so you write some shit about your lack of self confidence or relationship bullshit instead of your pretty good idea from earlier
>look back on it later
>it's actual garbage

Why shouldn't I use passive voice? I like the way it sounds and I especially enjoy it when using it with passive or mixed up characters, I think it adds to the mood

Tell me how to write an original medieval fantasy novel without dragons, elves, and dwarves.

>tfw my bookshelf is infested with silverfish