/lit/ - Literature

>>14455146
bump?

Books that explain why everything seems so fucked up?

Plato reasoned that things deemed beautiful are so because they are a simulacrum of the beautiful form from an ideal state.

Is the same true for things that are ugly and evil? Plato never seemed to address opposites when he mentioned his theory of forms. Are things we view as ugly simply ugly because they participate less in beauty than other objects? Or are they manifestations of an absolute ugly? Does this theory only apply to certain values?

>>6772247
I need to think more about it before i can answer.
There's a link ITT to a comment that theorizes non-existence could be the superposition of all existence.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode/thinkers-talk-about-nothing-13-03-21/
>What if nothing is really a superposition of everything?

>Sure, it has no size, no dimensions, no mass, and exhibits no measurable forces; however, in the same way that white light is a superposition of all frequencies of colored light, perhaps nothing can be manipulated in some similar way, like a prism does for white light to break it apart in to frequencies of colored light.

>Even the tiniest imperfection in the absolute perfection of nothingness might trigger the superposition of everything to split in some way that causes infinity of everything to come pouring out.

Of course that still leaves the question of what imperfection could cause it to split like that.
If non-existence is the superposition of everything then maybe things exist because it's easier to exist than to not exist.

What does /lit/ think about The Fate of Empires?