/lit/ - Literature

>>8879099
all philosophical shitposting will be footnotes to this, crumbs to anon's banquet, &c

the lacanian judo works: che vuoi? i hear you are saying this, but what is it you are really trying to say? and they are either going to repeat themselves or change the subject, but probably not say anything interesting.

the fact is that if people are declaiming that your philosophy/lit/basket-weaving is of no value it's basically a trap because they think in terms of proof and there may be no proofs for what you are probably & genuinely wondering about. it's why the more you try to respond, the stupider you will look, because ultimately they just want to feel confirmed in their ignorance. when it comes to philosophy the majority of people are cynical & disingenuous toolboxes anyways and Explain It Like I'm Ten is the dumbest fucking bait there is.

foucault had a nice line too: truth is given to the subject at a price that brings the subject's own being into question. if they ask a shallow question, they deserve a shallow answer. the truth drove people vastly more intelligent than fuckface STEMfaggots insane and unless they're fixing your house the only possible response to recursive garbage is to wait for them to ask something that's legit interesting and worth a response. which is unlikely to happen.

silence is in the end the correct answer 99% of the time, because 99% of the time what you are seeing is the metaphysics of production, a symptom, or pure cynicism.

so ignore them. pic related is what they deserve. you have better things to do anyways.

>>8865103
She was pretty bad even before that though.