/lit/ - Literature

>>11172822
They want to be authors so they can "fix" contemporary literature.

>>11172822
typical damage control

>>11172846
What makes them think they're different from everyone else? They spend their days shitposting with their secret club instead of gaining life experiences?

>>11172868
who was fernando pessoa, faggot

>>11172822
Why would modern literature be shit? Maybe because it does not have enough decent authors? Maybe that could be fixed by being an author and working on ones craft? I don't see any inconsistency here.

>>11172888
Not you

>>11172868
idk, ask them

But i don't want to be a writer

>>11172963
Yes, you do.

>>11172967
uh oh, anon saw through me

>>11172822
I like contemporary lit.
then again, I guess I'm not haunted by the crippling compulsion to show everyone how smart I am.

>>11172984
Now this guy is intelligent

>>11172994

>>11172984
>i have shit taste and it's ok because i don't act smart either

>>11172868
that the successful authors don't think contemporary literature is shit.

I've found this problem in other fields. I wanted to study psychology, so from that people assumed I would like all psychology. No, I thought about 99% of it was trash and I wanted to elevate the 1% that wasn't, and I think that is a good purpose. It is a bit impractical though, because it's true, most of the other people going into the field are attracted to it specifically because they like it as it is, which means they won't really be interested in changing, which means the 'haters' get pushed out by any means available.

>>11173348
t. I read a lot of books I hate so anons don't make fun of me

>>11172822
I want to be a writer and I don't hate contemporary literature. But those two ideas aren't contradictory anyway.

>>11172822
It’s not that all contemporary literature is shit, it’s just that the majority that gets recognition and awards these days is shit

I don't necessarily want to become a world wide known bestseller author, it would be great enough to make enough money from writing or translating to live from it.

>>11172963
Same, I don't like writing. I like playing with words and how they sound, but writing anything more than a couple paragraphs is painful, way too much abstract, long term planning. The details are too much, my thought processes are too tangential and scattered, like a child's.

>/lit/ is 1 person
>/lit/ is a variation of 1 person

>>11174039
Try shorter forms. Small essays, short stories, poems, flash fiction and such stuff.

>>11173402
>psychology

>>11172822
>I want to be an author
>I prefer modern literature
partly because I don't want to be stuck in the past and also because I think the prose is creaky. Language and narration have evolved.

>>11174270
>the prose is creaky
What the fuck is this supposed to mean?
>Language and narration have evolved.
In what relevant way have they evolved since, say, early 20th century?

>>11172822
>isn't catholic
>thinks he can still be a great writer

hmmmm

>>11174241
Exactly, it sucks, which is why it should be changed. But I didn't think of how against that the established academics would be

>>11174433
In what ways would you propose changes to psychology?

>>11174306
Grab a copy of The Tunnell by Gass and read, you small child of summer

>>11174766
kill all clincal, all the stain of psychiatry, and most of psychotherapy as well. It should all be from an evo psych perspective. That being said the world's best psychologist was Nietzsche. Other psychotherapists tried to base systems off of him but they really only detracted from it

>>11174829
and what is the function of this psychology of yours?.

>>11174994
being accurate? Idk let other people decide

>>11172822
this is why lit is so bitterly unhappy, art died like 200 years ago, then we had about a century of outrageously special snowflakes making monuments to themselves while tearing down all tradition, and then we had a century of garbage, bringing us to today, where everything is dead and retarded

>>11174829
I was taking you seriously until here.

>>11175072
was it the evo psych or the Nietzsche?

>>11175064
shut up you chimpanzee

>>11174829
evopsych is 80% garbage pseudoscience based on baseless conjectures

>>11175083
I am entirely right

>>11175092
it might be mostly baseless at the moment, but it is the only plausible framework to understand human nature that we have apart from outright mystical stuff.

I notice that the people criticizing evo-psych never do it from a desire to improve upon the theories, they just want to throw out the whole theory.

>>11172902
damn...

>>11175093
You're a brainless monkey and a resentful pleb

>>11172822
if you don't have a story to tell, don't write. find anything else to do.

>>11175078
Evo psych. Unless you have some good reading material.

>>11175115
you're being rather rude. I am not resentful at all, it is a fact that around 200 years ago the traditional forms of art started degrading, and we had about a century of heavy 'experimentation', and then a century of almost total dissolution.

In the past century of music there is not a single Wagner or Beethoven, and in the 19th century there is not anything comparable to Handel or Mozart. The same patterns, give or take a few decades apply to literature as well.

>>11175119
I still reject most evo psych, especially since it seems most anyone can just call themselves an evolutionary psychologist, like daniel dennet. But it is still better than most other psychology fields, and moreover it is just that psychology should be done from an evolutionary perspective. As in, before trying to establish a new theory, and especially labeling something as a disorder, try to think why that behavior would exist, from an evolutionary perspective.

But David Buss and E.O. Wilson do good work.

>>11175148
You will make no inroads in the humanities namedropping Wilson, who was the subject of actual pseudo-riots.

They are simply never going to accept the logic of Darwin as it applies to humans, the cries for rigour are nothing but special pleading.

>>11175092
Of course it could be done poorly, but it doesn't have to be baseless. It wouldn't be steeped in as much testing/retesting and would remain largely theoretical, but as long as you apply logic it isn't baseless.

>>11172822
>>11172846
>>11172868
I swear, i'm going to be the best thing since blowjobs man

>>11175160
I never even got the logic of the hate. They jump from sociobiology to eugenics, why?

>>11172822
I don’t want to be an author. But I do think all literature is shit (not just contemporary).

>>11175171
Humans are not supposed to be animals at all, the enlightenment version of the human, which is still the reigning paradigm, was lifted from Christianity and describes a kind of 'soul' gifted to each individual, which makes them all equal under the light of some overarching principle(then God, now various dictates of leftism).

What's even worse though is that evo-psych appears to, if not justify the existence of, offer reasons why the abolition of, things like hierarchy, sexual and racial inequality, competition, violence, etc. is unlikely to happen.

It just fucks up the entire framework they have been working on for centuries. Everything about it is toxic to their program.

>>11175100
>I notice that the people criticizing evo-psych never do it from a desire to improve upon the theories
That's because they're unfalsifiable garbage, same with psychoanalysis. I don't care about some autist's baseless speculation and the sooner this stuff gets universally recongized as the garbage the it is the better.

>>11175123
>It is a fact
No, it's your retarded, uniformed opinion that you should keep for yourself.

>>11175193
surely you will admit that we evolved pain for evolutionary reasons and that pain is a part of psychology?

>>11175194
Since you've offered nothing of substance and just insulted me, I will ignore you from now on.

>>11175196
only if you admitt that you're a faggot

>>11175200
Sorry but if I wanted to hear Prager-U tier retarded statements about art I'd talk with my illiterate grandmother. Now fuck off.

>>11175064
Actually, that's how art started.

>>11175211
I understand that you're incapable of offering your own argument, but you could at least be polite. For people of your calibre it is the best option.

>>11175193
What's the unfalsifiable part? Evolution is falsifiable, and serious people are pretty set that evolution is real now. The brain is not special, in this way, so the consequence of knowing that we are built through evolution is just applying that conclusion to the brain, all behavior can be expected to have evolution at it's root. So it is not a matter of whether evolutionary psychology is falsifiable or not, it is just the necessary result of other conclusions. And, accepting this, we can look at human behavior and assume it is not random, and then (making sure to apply occam's razor) look backwards to find the best evolutionary explanation.

And psychology isn't special here, you could just as easily call looking for adaptiveness in any other part of the body nonfalsifiable

>>11175262
>we can look at human behavior and assume it is not random
You see? This is the kind of made up bullshit I'm talking about. Did you at least read the relevant literature before talking out of your ass? Do you even know that even evolutionary psychology THEMSELVES admit that not all behaviour can be reduced to evolution and a good part of it is due to "genetic noise" as they call it?
People treat this half pseudoscience like the new physics or the new gospel, it's a fucking cult, exactly the same thing that has happened with Freud

>>11175270
psychologists*

and i'dd add that the Vienna circle was a fucking mistake

>>11175270
It is completely irrational to think that basic human behaviors are not evolved. All other animals' behavior is thought of in these terms, 'genetic noise' notwithstanding.

Humans are obviously more complicated because of culture, but to just throw out the idea smacks of ideological preference.

>>11175279
>if u disagree with me ur ideology lole
everytime, just like psychoanalysts accuse me of being a capitalist shill whenever I call out their bullshit

>>11172868
Life experience just means being a normalfaggot who writes the horrid shit that makes contemporary literature garbage. It directly follows that a lack of real life experience is counter to the typical modern malaise.

>>11175282
OK i apologize for the unneeded accusation. you're right.

But what exactly is your opposition to thinking of our behavior in terms of evolved instincts? Isn't that the main plausible source of how we act?

>>11175064
You're not wrong.

>>11175270
The noise I think you are talking about would still b as the result of evolution, say something is a side effect of of some other adaptive trait. But if you are talking about something like punctuated equilibrium, or just completely arbitrary traits, I don't buy much into it,

>>11175282
you just fucking compared evo psych to a cult. Cult is thrown around for nothing these days. If you have any sort of beliefs, it can be called a cult

>>11175060
being accurate?, really?. what is the difference?, some psychiatrists go saying his theories are wrong and still giving pills to people?. come on. this sounds too lazy
>let other people decide
then what is the difference between psychiatry and a "therapist",

>im sorry, psychology is far off, you cant change for better something this evolved.

>>11175947
well I have given up now, just so you know

And I mainly meant I would focus on being accurate, and then whatever people want to do with that info, if anything, is up to them. Maybe the main problem with psychology is that people don't go into it scientifically, they go into it as a sort of activist/humanitarian, already deciding they need to "help" people, and then just look backwards from there to support preloaded conclusions. Like attachment theory is an area I am interested in, but every person who does research has already come to the conclusion that secure is the ideal one and is only interested in looking for ways to convert people to secure, it's maddening