/lit/ - Literature

>evil or morally grey protagonists
>evil characters
>nihilism everywhere
>morally grey stuff everywhere
Why is this so prevalent in contemporary literature?

I remember a thread on /lit/, some anons were discussing their "comfort characters" from books. What is that and how does it work?

When people ask where to start with philosopher X, I always give them a straight line from the Greeks to that particular philosopher, often mentioning various works, giving them a simple list.
But people call me retarded. At least outside of /lit/.
Why?
Because I don't give secondary sources. I can say: read this and that, but then some other guy says, no, that's dumb, read "this dude writing about this philosopher" and then go for "this dude writing about this philosopher". But they NEVER recommend reading the actual work of this philosopher. Just some guy talking about this philosopher.

Am I retarded? I don't understand. Do people really just read someone talking about for example Aristotle and say they read Aristotle? Or someone talking about Descartes and they say they read Descartes, while they read some american retarded professor talking about him?

>>19103971
>>19104010
please stop
you remind me I was like this before reading the scholastics
it makes me feel cringe beyond human understanding

>>19089109
>Christ was a historicized mythical figure
the absolute state of /lit/ 2021
i'm closing this retarded board and going to read some books

>>19067063
To find my home.
I am searching for some destination, for a place I can call home.

You reminded me anon.
At my old work we had meetings once in a while. Before it started, some participators had a task to do. One of the tasks was "wisdom for the day".
People tasked with that normally found a sentence or two on google "best smart quotes about love" or something.
But I was autistic.
When they tasked me with the wisdom for the day, I gave them three long quotes from various authors related to each other, one of them being from Oswald Spengler.
>We are born into this time and must bravely follow the path to the destined end. There is no other way. Our duty is to hold on to the lost position, without hope, without rescue, like that Roman soldier whose bones were found in front of a door in Pompeii, who, during the eruption of Vesuvius, died at his post because they forgot to relieve him. That is greatness. That is what it means to be a thoroughbred. The honorable end is the one thing that can not be taken from a man.
My wisdom for the day took over 20 minutes of the meeting. They didn't interrupt. I ended with some takes on Hegel's Phenomenology because why not. It was peak kino.

>>18850336
>this is what anglos unironically believe

>>18815238

>Why do you write like old men from XIX and XX century?
My betareader asked me literally that.

>>18423765
>Atheists have objectively better critical thinking skills than religious people

>girls
>being honestly interested in culture

I started about a week ago and am not following the schedule, but I really enjoy seeing such knowledgeable anons in this thread.
I am reading the Oxford Brief history, and want to clarify a few points that I think I understand

>OG Aegeans 40,000 years ago
>Crete doing its own thing
>Indo-Europeans come in and bring ancient Greek and fuse with Aegeans eventually
>Minoans form (take over?) on Crete
>Mycenaeans form from Indo/Aegean mainlanders
>Mycenaeans go to Crete and take it from Minoans

Is that right? I am trying to distinguish between Minoans, Mycenaeans, Aegeans, and Indos.

>mfw people think Lauren Southern is anything but a pretty piece of meat

>>8898877

> Implying you can disprove free will using le chemicals meme

>>8220740

So you literally admit my position is more epistemologically correct than yours? This is the fucking limit of your shit for brains ligotti?

You're joking, right?

>>8188454

>>7956932

>>7919344
AAAHH MY SIDES

>>7899844

>Squire

>>7806668

>mfw you're probably homosex

>>7801819

> '' I'm unable to form any coherent logical arguments in favor of my belief of which the sole purpose is to justify my inadequacy and cynsm''
> Someone is trying to do just that
> O-o-oh s-s-hit
> Better use ad hominem to discredit my opponent

Non-American here, are you guys really this retarded when it comes to politics?