/lit/ - Literature

>>17929171
>Platonic-fascist top-down solutions
Imagine misreading Plato so badly that you agree with Karl fucking Popper. Holy shit, the Republic was not a political formula. You'll cowards don't even know about Plato's rejection of the Thirty. Besides, Land is now full-on nRx, so what does that tell ya?
>It avoids Ideas
To its detriment. The Phaedrus is famous for its concept of theia mania. Anyone who reads Plato seriously knows that elenctic discourse is but the first step to philosophy, that true dialectic is internal to the individual, and that divine madness/love is the full realization of philosophy.
>[Schizoanalysis] sticks to diagrams
My fucking God, as though Plato did not already discuss the pitfalls of discursive reasoning in the Divided Line.

>>17929507
>prior to him philosophers were professionals
LOL. Never mind Thales was such a sky-gazer that he fell down a well, never mind that Anaxagoras was driven into exile, never mind that Heraclitus was known for his gnomic riddles with little practical use, never mind that Pythagoras started a cult, never mind that the Eleatic Xenophanes was a poet, Plato's Academy did not charge tuition. And if history is to be believed, he went off on that little Syracusan experiment.
>see the seven sages
Like Solon, of whom Plato was a direct descendant? Lmao at you not reading the Greeks.

This thread, man.

>>12022552
>One sticks one’s finger into the soil to tell by the smell in what land one is: I stick my finger in existence — it smells of nothing. Where am I? Who am I? How came I here? What is this thing called the world? What does this world mean? Who is it that has lured me into the world? Why was I not consulted, why not made acquainted with its manners and customs instead of throwing me into the ranks, as if I had been bought by a kidnapper, a dealer in souls? How did I obtain an interest in this big enterprise they call reality? Why should I have an interest in it? Is it not a voluntary concern? And if I am to be compelled to take part in it, where is the director? I should like to make a remark to him. Is there no director? Whither shall I turn with my complaint?

>>11118649
>Either/Or, Part I
The complete portrait of the aesthete (Greek scholar, narcissist, opera-lover, &c), with nuggets of accidental wisdom scattered throughout. [Also, very funny.]
>Either/Or, Part II
A ruinous takedown of the aesthetic — I mean, anyone who jived with Part I and doesn't leave Part II feeling bootyblasted is illiterate. Musings on the male/female dynamic and the role of man in society.
>The Sickness Unto Death
One of the greatest works of psychology ever put to paper. A practical self-help book that manages to be beautiful and terrifying.
>Two Ages
Cultural prophecy.
>Concluding Unscientific Postscript
Hegel getting brutally fisted; the birth of existentialism.
>Works of Love
A crash course in homiletics, of great value to critical theory.
>...
>Fear and Trembling
Autistic ramblings about faith.

>>11085567
What the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you little bitch?

>>11085540
>he's a hunchbacked melancholy virgin
>he writes the most realistic—yet poetic—description of marriage ever put to paper
For shame, OP.

>>10981331
You don't need to read other philosophers before reading "Either/Or," which is a fairly self-contained literary work. (Of course, it helps if you've read your Shakespeare, Schiller, and Greek tragedy.)

"The Sickness Unto Death" is very confusing at first (intentionally so) because K is responding to and superseding Hegelianism (a very esoteric doctrine to begin with). Despite the nature of that reply, you don't even need to read Hegel before; as long as you have the fortitude to slog through the bits that seem dense, it's an amazingly relevant and beautiful little book. It is very Christian, but not in the namby-pamby "Why was there only one set of footprints in the sand?" way.

"Concluding Unscientific Postscript" is another response to German idealism, and I don't know if I would tell you that you *need* to read the German idealists before it. It's helpful and puts everything in proper context, sure, but you can still get a lot out of it without such a background.

Really, the only philosophy you need to read before K. is Plato's Socratic dialogues. K. idolizes Socrates and takes a lot of ironic cues from him.

>>10981347
>tfw you're really a Kitty

>A human being is spirit. But what is spirit? Spirit is the self. But what is the self? The self is a relation that relates itself to itself or is the relation’s relating itself to itself in the relation; the self is not the relation but is the relation’s relating itself to itself.

>>10937358
Same, except still in my 20s and obsessed with Ovid's myth of Narcissus and Echo — reading shit like Simone Weil, Levinas, Knud Logstrup, etc.

I think Kierkegaard ruined my life. Some anon once called him "a philosophical dead-end" and, as much as I love his work, I'm starting to understand what he meant . . .

What are your parents like, Opie?

>>10891982
what the fuck did you just say about me, you little aesthete?

>>10887370

>>10816719
>Kierkegaard
Easily one of my favorite authors. His works on anonymity and humor (*cough*) were prophetic.

>Are you not aware that there comes a midnight hour when everyone must unmask; do you believe that life will always allow itself to be trifled with; do you believe that one can sneak away just before midnight in order to avoid it? Or are you not dismayed by it? I have seen people in life who have deceived others for such a long time that eventually they are unable to show their true nature. I have seen people who have played hide-and-seek so long that at last in a kind of lunacy they force their secret thoughts on others just as loathsomely as they proudly had concealed them from them earlier ...
>You practice the art of being mysterious to everybody. My young friend, suppose there was no one who cared to guess your riddle—what joy would you have in it then?

>>10772455
>any Hegelian after Kierkegaard
>based
BAKA

>>10754930