/lit/ - Literature

>>10533424
Look at the cunt's eyes.

people on 4chan hate people who get laid and hate ugly people who get laid most of all because it undermines their self-justification that the reason they can't get laid is how shallow everyone else is

>>10533424
Odd looking duck.

>>10533424
His philosophy is dogshit and a poor mockery of Heidegger.
>Dude social constructs lmao

His fiction is great though

>>10533424
His politics and general attitude toward literature are deeply superficial. He was an intelligent and creative man but sadly never overcame his vanity

>>10533457
Explain how social constructs are not real

>>10533457
>his fiction is great
No, it’s not, actually

>>10533424
Jordan Peterson of that time desu

>>10533465
Not the point

>>10533466
Nausea is a legitimately fascinating work. He was a far better existentialist than Camus in any case though dwarfed by Beckett

>>10533497
So he's come up with a completely truthful and constructive theory, one that actually contains practicality, but he's shit?

>>10533497
The point?

>>10533509
More he's extremely intellectually limited and failed to carry his logic to its consistent ends. There's nothing practical in his work, it has no base and is all just so many words

>>10533424
because he looks ike this

>>10533424
You want the real answer: he was a leftist.

>>10533465
Social constructs are a social construct.

>>10533519
pretty broad and unspecific desu

>>10533519
All philosophy is words until someone takes action with them. To say it's "just words" is to imply philosophy is just nothing but an exercise in literature. And if that were the case, every philosopher is equally useless.

>>10533544
Much like his philosophy, what do you expect?

>>10533534
>lookitstryingtothink.jpeg

>>10533550
>All philosophy is words until someone takes action with them.

>>10533550
The difference is justification.
Kant justifies his statements, Heidegger justified his statements.
Sartre just blurted whatever sounded right to him at any moment, his deconstruction was duplicitous and aimed only towards what was strategically convenient for him and his fashionable persona.
In short he's simply not a philosopher

>>10533574
He's not a philosopher because he doesn't fit your specific understanding of a philosopher - what a close-minded mentality.

How can you come to such a consensus, and attempt to support it by namedropping philosophers who do things the way you like it?

>>10533592
Rigorousness of thought is the only thing which seperates philosophy from mere rhetoric.
Whether he qualifies for your standards of a thinker is up to you but regardless this lack of categorical co-ordination in his work renders everything he wrote too ambigious and ill-connected for me to consider him a useful foundation for my own thoughts

I do genuinely like him as a fiction writer though where these matters aren't important

>>10533613
A lack of coordination is, I believe, a more humble and realistic perspective. To think you can have a "complete" or "finished" philosophical theory or position, carefully categorised is nothing but an exercise in futile vanity.

extremely ugly, both inside and out

>>10533527

Ding ding ding. Common denominator of everyone /lit/ shits on these days. Even JK Rowling, lol

>>10533631
>who is jordan peterson?

>>10533452
I could get laid too if I were a rapist like Sartre.

>>10533631
>JK Rowling
But Jk Rowling is shit even without the additional leftism?

>>10535437
>sells more than 400 million copies
Her audience obviously isn't 20-year-old pseudoinellectuals.

>>10533424
> turns down nobel prize and calls it bourgeouise

based desu senpai

>>10533433
I really didnt want to click the thread and have a comment such as this be the first perusal because at the mere sight of the photo I was primed to experience an inescapable hilarity at the pointed statement of such obvious grotesquery.
As you can imagine, a hearty guffaw hath burst forth from my lips

>>10533424
>life is kind of meaningless and crap
>lets keep doing it anyway

«Je n'aimais pas Sartre, d'abord à cause de son physique. Je ne croyais, et je ne crois toujours pas, qu'un homme affligé d'un strabisme tel que le sien puisse avoir une claire vision du monde. Même en fermant les yeux, il est réduit à s'en faire une idée, et cette idée ne peut pas être droite»

>>10533424
I think he's fantastic. He's a bit of a wallower is all

Dude just looks like that 'cause he was followed around by dream crabs, that's all.

>>10533424
Always got a Fred and Rosemary West-vibe from him and Beauvoir

>>10535578
shut the fuck up

>>10533424

He is too much of a pop cultural icon for the contrarians to like him, too much watered down and severely misunderstood Heidegger for the philosophyfags to like him, too much of a chad for the /r9k/ crossboarders to like him >>10533452, too french for the anglos to like him, too much of a commie for the /pol/acks to like him, too much of an ugly fucker for the narcissists to like him, and that covers pretty much every significant identity marker on this board.

His plays are OK, his literary fiction is mostly shit, he is brilliant at times, for instance the analysis of the look, but ultimately too tedious. He suffered, like Rand and Kerouac, from a terrible case of amphetamine prose, and that just makes it even more insufferable to slog through the half-baked motormouthing in order to find those few hidden gems.

>>10535705
Indeedy. Nietzsche had syphilis, Sartre had crabs

>>10535743
This.

>>10533424
His War Journals are good. Hanging out at the Weather Station camp with his m8s writing whatever comes to mind. A Verso paperback collects them.

>>10535743
/thread

>>10533631
????
like 90% of the people on the internet who cry about rowling are literal commies butthurt about her liberalism

>>10535774
>>10535926

shut up

>>10533592
the point of philosophy is justifying opinions not just giving them out like you do with your asshole

This is the reason. A hack that romanticizes tyrants

>>10533424
You looked at his face right?

>>10537188
>muh holy liberalism

>>10537733
Shoo shoo slimey leftist

>>10533424
Camus is legitimately better
Sartre is too much of a tryhard

>>10533457
Heidegger and Sartre both just mocked Kierkegaard