/lit/ - Literature

>>11339140
>that is not beneficial
define beneficial

>don't want to sink my time into something that is not beneficial
as far as hobbies go, I can guarantee that literature is THE most valuable, maybe other than studying music/an instrument. Literature is way richer, wider, deeper than any video games or anime, and 99.99 percent of film. if you're looking for some bullshit reason like 'attention span', 'social credit', 'learn more stuff', then you have all of those, but the true value of literature goes way deeper than that. maybe someone else can explain better.

>>11339140
Like I posted earlier. It increases reading comprehension. Important for the shit on which you sign your name.

>>11339191
actually literature/philosophy is on par or even better than an instrument, it depends on who you are

>>11339191
>>11339204
As well as working full-time, I am also a classical musician and composer.

I wanted to start studying literature more to get inspiration for classical music compositions. But, classical music is already non-beneficial enough as it is, so I don't want to waste more time.

>>11339185
I would say anything that does not attribute to:

>security for survival
>providing for your family
>securing resources for your lineage
Would maybe not be beneficial

>>11339221
well literature does none of the things you listed, so you might as well give up lol

>>11339140
>What are the practical/pragmatic reasons for studying literature? I haven't read a book since college and want to explore literature more but also don't want to sink my time into something that is not beneficial

>>11339260
this tbqh

escape/entertainment + improved vocabulary

>>11339221
All of your interpretations of benefit rest on the procurement of resources. Apparently all work and no play makes Anon a happy boy.

>>11339140
i feel like elon musk's twitter would resonate with you
also def steven pinker

>>11339276
>Apparently all work and no play makes Anon a happy boy.

Happiness is not always related to beneficial in the scope of life responsibility.

That's why coal miners died going to work

>>11339275
Do you think there's anything you can learn from reading /lit/-tier literature that can help you navigate life, or make better decisions?

Like at work, in relationships, in business, or stuff like that

>>11339299
dude you're missing the point
literature (and more broadly art) is an expression of the artist's psyche. it is meant to be beautiful and valuable in its own way, not make your sales increase 5%. with your mindset you will probably be financially successful, and if thats what makes you happy theres nothing wrong with that, but its not what art/literature is about. maybe philosophy but philosophy doesnt care about whether it is applicable as long as it is true
the real blood meridian is the friends you make along the way

>>11339391
>it is meant to be beautiful
What is the functioning value of beauty though?

To me, high-art in Europe strengthened national identity and a "divine right" mentality which inspired countrymen to take their work more seriously, or their heritage more seriously.

There is economic value in beautiful art or beautiful ideas, imo. You are basically arguing for aestheticism though

>>11339402
beauty is good in its own right. i admire art for the ideas it conveys. if its purpose js to inspire people to let their king/boss/president fuck their wife more often its missing the point entirely.
economic value may become attached regardless but is of no importance to the artisirc integrity of the work.

>>11339409
to clarify: its not just the idea it conveys itself. it is also a question of how well the idea is conveyed, and of course there is a level of subjectivity to my interpretation
and the concept of idea is all encompassing: it can be a plot, a moral code, both, neither. the thing in the artist's mind being expressed

>>11339409
>beauty is good in its own right. i admire art for the ideas it conveys. if its purpose js to inspire people to let their king/boss/president fuck their wife more often its missing the point entirely.
>economic value may become attached regardless but is of no importance to the artisirc integrity of the work.

I guess I am arguing that there has to be a biological (or Darwinist) reason to make art. Humans don't do things for the sake of doing them

Of course people enjoy art/literature/music for the sake of it's ideas or beauty. But there has to be a biological reason that people crave these things, for the purpose of survival.

I think Jordan Peterson made the argument that artists identify problems/occurrences in society before anyone else has, and they sometimes do it without even realizing it. It just kind of comes out.

>>11339140
I really don’t think people who think like this would enjoy literature very much. Learn a craft or something instead.

>>11339430
>jordan peterson

If you're already well off and can afford it then it's fantastic. If you're a normal person who needs a middle-class paying job / 60,000 + / within the next couple years then you should really become a student of it in your off-time.

>>11339438
this
>>11339430
im not confident humans are only bound by natural tendencies. i dont have any one religion to appeal to but i dont agree that we are limited to what will get us a mate the fastest.

>>11339185
Not unbeneficial

>>11339402
sigh

>>11339449
>i dont have any one religion to appeal to but i dont agree that we are limited to what will get us a mate the fastest.

I'm not actually a Darwinist, I'm a Fundementalist Christian, but I think that there is a biological imperative that drives humans (or all living things) to act with reason

I don't think it's always about finding a mate (although I think artists sometimes make art for this reason, like peacocking). Jordan Peterson made the argument that artists subconsciously identify issues in society before others do through their work.

Somebody may consume art to find perspectives on reality that others are not seeing. Maybe there is something in the art that points out a future danger that others are not correctly identifying. Maybe something in the art will make you view a situation in your life differently and act in a more beneficial way than if you had not seen the art.

Even religious art could be useful to bind people to the church which in turn strengthens communities/families over generations, depending on your view of church

>>11339430
>jordan peterson
ah so thats why youre an idiot

>>11339470
>snarky substanceless post

>>11339476
>soulless petersonfag posting on my board

>>11339475
>"muh peterson"
>still has no argument

>>11339485
>>11339488

>>11339488
>random pictures of art from google images
every time

>>11339472
>fundie and lobster
that would explain why you cant enjoy things
im assuming, since youre here, youre young. please dont throw it away on fundamentalism. at least find a less vicious and allconsuming branch of christianity

>>11339513
Any other form of Christianity have no self-conviction and have devolved into a new-age self-help cult that vaguely mentions Jesus/Grace or something. It will absolutely be destroyed by something that actually has conviction (divine right, manifest destiny), like Islam or Fundamentalism.

>can't enjoy things
I never said that, you are just butthurt because I am deconstructing the value of art past "IT'S SOOPER MEANINGFUL AND STUFF JUST..JUST FEEL IT OR SOMETHING"

>>11339526
>actually has conviction (divine right, manifest destiny)
yes... soulless bug market imperialism.. true conviction...

>>11339526
if your parents even let you go to uni, im assuming you're a stemlord? and id rather belong to a selfhelp cult than a destructive one that represents the degeneration of a venerable religion into a backwater freak show

also im just trying to answer your question and explain where valur in art comes from. you're ignorance doesn't affect my enjoyment of art. take my help or leave it.

>>11339532
>bug market imperialism
>brainlet marxist who gets assblasted by even the mention of the concept of "profit"

All things are imperialism whether you like it or not

>>11339538
I have a bachelor's degree in business and I am a classical composer/performer as well, if that gives you perspective into what I am saying.

>I'd rater belong to a self-help cult
I was too loose with the term "cult". "Cult" implies that a group has self-conviction and zealotry. I can actually admire a cult. Watered down new-age community churches are just rooms of sad nihilists who want to hear a TedTalk version of a sermon.

>degeneration of a venerable religion
You're kidding

>im just trying to answer your question
By saying that I cited Jordan Peterson and that I'm a fundamentalist so I'm incapable of enjoying art? That is silly. High religious art was mostly created by what would be called "fundamentalists" today.

I don't even like Jordan Peterson much either, I just thought that was an interesting idea. Apparently he must wield some power to cause autistic screeching from anons

>>11339430
You can never speak for anyone's motivations but yourself: (some) artists create art because they have the compulsion for creative expression. You are captivated by an image or a feeling that isn't easily articulated into any small series of words, but the picture in your mind's eye is expressed, explored, interpreted, felt, all in a fleeting instant. It's almost revelatory, and inspiring. You twirl the image around in your head like a trinket in your fingers, yearning somehow to release it, or to be released from it. When things, unfulfilled desires, with particular potency remain latently and recurringly in your conscious or subconscious, it is often because they seek resolution; whether this is something you wish you would've said to a person whom you can't stop having intruding thoughts of until you speak again and settle an issue, or it happens to be a revelatory idea that seeks expression from you rather than you seeking to express it. The image commands you, it consumes your thoughts, and it has to be given voice. The artist doesn't necessarily create art for the public, the artist creates art firstly for themselves. It just happens that the expressions that might be widely relatable to many people, people who were merely awaiting a conduit to crystallize their own unarticulated feelings to do it for them, may be something that becomes a critical cultural landmark. But they aren't doing it out of an aspiration to fame, for some material benefit as you seek to compass it, but for the benefit of their own psyche and emotional stability, because this unarticulated thing keeps plucking at them from the recess of their mind where a connection of ideas has been intuited maybe completely unknown to them, and it wants to be vocalized. The benefit is purely the flowering of the individual. You just so happen to exist to experience it with them, or after them.

>>11339140
Morality is inherited, not through blood, but culture. Books are culture.

>>11339556
Those benefits you seek are not found in literature. You’d be better off with some other hobby. Hope that answers your question.

>>11339568
Here's an answer that makes sense to me

So books have value by spreading culture to the readers? Those readers then spread that culture by embodying the ideas in the books, living them out, and spreading it to others right?

>>11339565
>You can never speak for anyone's motivations but yourself: (some) artists create art because they have the compulsion for creative expression.

I'm not saying that art doesn't have a spiritual or divine aspect to it that transcends the material world. I just think that the spiritual drives the biological, or vice versa. So there is a biological (or Darwinian) aspect to the creation of art.

I made this thread to ask about the biological drive and purpose of art, not to claim that there isn't a non-materialist aspect to it completely.

>>11339526
You're not deconstructing shit, lmao you're just clinging to this naive evolutionary psychology and instrumentalism "IF IT DOESNT MAKE ME MONEY OR PRAISE JESUS ITS USELESS!!"

>>11339556
hmm... I'm not marxist...
>implying you have to be marxist to call bullshit on muh divine right muh manifest destiny
Worldly kings and exploiting the religiosity of their chattel. Machiavellian pacts sealed in the blood of believers. Where does authentic religious conviction enter into this? You would faster sacrifice your son for Mammon than God.

Why is there no monasticism in American fundamentalist Christianity?

>>11339592
>you're just clinging to this naive evolutionary psychology and instrumentalism
>naive
The only argument I've gotten is "muh feelz" an autistic screeching over citing one idea from Jordan Peterson

>"IF IT DOESNT MAKE ME MONEY OR PRAISE JESUS ITS USELESS!!
Resorting to strawmanning out of desperation, sad

>>11339576
More or less - Is this even a point of contention? Books, and not just those that are explicitly didactic, influence man's actions.

Nietzche wrote about this but I can't recall where.

>>11339595
>Worldly kings and exploiting the religiosity of their chattel.
Manifest Destiny is what drove the American settlers to conquer the continent. It is literally what secured the existence of their ancestors, and there was no "king" preaching this to his followers either. This was a foundation myth used to conquer. It is a biological tool.

>Where does authentic religious conviction enter into this
Fundementalism believes that it has the divine right to destroy all other forms of Christianity and convert the entire world. This is another form of manifest destiny, taken from Mark 16:15. Obviously this is not in a violent way, but an ideological way.

All other forms of Christianity have taken a wishy-washy neutral stance of just "co-existing" and depressing nihilistic garbage like that.

Any religious belief that is not zealous will be conquered by a religion that is zealous (with manifest destiny). Check Europe and the muslim invasion for proof of this

>Why is there no monasticism in American fundamentalist Christianity?
Probably theological reasons, never looked into it because I don't really care much

>>11339612
>Is this even a point of contention?
Sure. There are questions like "How much influence does one book reader have in the world?". Does the butterfly effect happen when somebody reads a book? Is it worth reading for this purpose?

Is the cultural influence a book has on an individual more powerful than the cultural programming that 10,000,000 normies are consuming on netflix?

>>11339583
To tl;dr my post in materialist terms for you: they create art for themselves because it alters muh chemicals in muh brain, because we're just sacks of meat after all, to levels appropriate to achieving cognitive equilibrium, wherein before their chemical balance were out of kilter causing perceptual disturbance. Does "chemicals" make it easier for you? Because it's a physiological aspect that you imagine you could touch, so it's "objectively" valid?

>>11339605
resorting to superstition to curb your fear of death, sad.

>>11339636
>Does "chemicals" make it easier for you?
No because that goes without saying. Chemicals in our brain are always active

Pleasure has it's own biological drives. To alleviate suffering. But sometimes art is not that pleasurable, but people consume it anyway.

Reading a book can be tedious or frustrating, but people keep doing it anyway. Maybe people think there will be something in the book that justifies the suffering of life, or puts the suffering in a new perspective. Or alerts them of something dangerous that hadn't thought of before.

Actually just reading the book of proverbs out of The Bible changed my life and dating habits, may have stopped me from making a bad marriage/dating decision.

This would be a biological benefit to reading books, I think

>>11339583
just stop. literature doesn't have what you're looking for. eod.
>>11339565
this is a great post but i would argue fame is a consideration at least some of the time among even good artists. it shouldnt be the driving force but i think it's usually there at least a little

>>11339659
>it's

>>11339652
Literally every person alive resorts to myths to deal with the fear of death

>w-when you die you just go in the ground!
>it-..it all j-just goes black, r-right?
>if God is real, he'll just give me a pass, right? right?
The difference is that mine is real

>>11339666
>just stop. literature doesn't have what you're looking for. eod.
I'm actually pretty sure it does now

>>11339668
but the arguments that it is are very weak
maybe it's better than most explanations but that doesn't make it a good claim in and of itself
the amount of devotion your claim demands also holds it to a much higher level of scrutiny

>>11339668
OK Cool

>>11339668
*strawman intensifies*

>>11339623
American fundamentalism is decadent and senile and has never conquered anything. The major religious forces in American colonisation were Mediterranean Catholicism, Anglicanism, German Protestantism, as well as a licorice assortment of various breeds of Anabaptism, Puritanism, and Calvinism. What trace is left of any of these? Dust religions. Footprint faiths. We turn to the modern landscape (passing over the new age pluralist ecumenical nursing homes you already proudly distinguished yourself from), with its backwater baptists, suburban Sadducees - peddlers of a dumb, stagnant retail Christianity. Despite being cursed and branded by the same epithet, the American fundamentalists have little in common with their Islamic counterpart and its post-decadent brute vigour. Though I have my doubts about dreaded "radical Islam's" ability to meaningfully conquer anything or anyone for very long either.

Maybe in some optimistic view of the situation there is the germ of some militia rural Handsmaid Tale civilisation in the American nu-protestant subconscious... but something big would have to snap and leave a power vacuum for that American underclass to fill. As an Australian it seems it becomes less relevant by the year. A convenient, easy scapegoat for urban liberal dumb dumbs it once was, but even they've grown bored of it now. The computerised male is a more immediate (and novel) threat.

>>11339673
>but the arguments that it is are very weak

All arguments come to an unsettled circular stalemate. Although there is a lot of historical evidence for Christianity that is not discussed in the public sphere for some reason.

But even after observing all of the evidence, it will still come down to accepting that it is real in faith or not

>the amount of devotion your claim demands
Every ideology demands a large amount of devotion, including baseline secularism

Want to know why you should read?

Some individuals take pride in their repugnant tastes. More often than not, they are never confronted to answer for them. If they are asked to, however, they could never conceive of true meaning for their thoughts or actions – and if they could do something so important as reason, then they would not be in such an absolute state of enlightened despair to begin with. This is the typical abstraction of a modernist that says you are wrong, they are right, but it’s all subjective anyways so what’s the point. In my opinion they should peacefully be denied their rights to an opinion entirely. The modernist is often skeptical, but only of the ideas that confront their varying degrees of pop culture normality. The modernist is out to get you and he won’t stop until you Assimilate or Die spiritually and intellectually.

He will tell you that enjoying niche fragrances, or horology, is nothing but an ostentatious show of wealth and that you should put your money to better use. But who is more guilty of buying items that were made to be bought and then thrown away without second thought? To them, happiness is commodified, cheap, and ships within 2 days using Amazon Prime. He will spend more in a lifetime on plastic toys and new cool techno-gadgets than any cultured man making thoughtful decisions would. The oceans are not filled with the whimsical vanity waste products of people who enjoy high art, reading, and leisure.

Above all else, the abstract modernist is a hypocrite. He will happily reject your religion while quoting scripture - of which they do not believe or understand - about why you’re Wrong About Something. This is the man which defiantly questions and berates people that, at the very least, inquire into conspiracy theories, reactionary thought, or religious mysticism in the pursuit of truth. To them, the very act of investigating something esoteric in normative terms is intellectually offensive, Dangerous, or weird. The irony of this is of course lost on them (how about you?).

Start reading so you can start defending yourself against these people. Their social contracts are unfair and only benefit them. Reading helps you see the Fine Print of whatever it is they're trying to sell you.

>>11339703
so what you're saying is the true religion was designed, by a God who desires a relationship with us, in such a way that it appears likely to be false.

>>11339687
>American fundamentalism is decadent and senile and has never conquered anything
Those were boomers

>Catholics involved in colonisation
Sure partially, but it wasn't Catholicism that brought 1776, it was Protestantism.

>German Protestantism is dead
It is the cornerstone of American religion

>Maybe in some optimistic view of the situation there is the germ of some militia rural Handsmaid Tale civilisation in the American nu-protestant subconscious
Radical fundamentalism is growing quickly across America right now. A new church just opened here in my city.

Pastor Steven Anderson just had a global soul-winning event that thousands of people participated in. Neo-Fundamentalism is the only future for Christianity in America, unless Catholicism makes some crazy comeback, which I doubt at the moment.

>Puritanism
Just want to add that as STDs grow and social problems that boomers started keep progressing, Puritanism will become a more logical conclusion

>Though I have my doubts about dreaded "radical Islam's" ability to meaningfully conquer anything or anyone
Wait 30 years and see if the middle east become united (almost happened before and is likely to happen again if America declines) and if the Muslim population explodes in Europe while white birth rates decline

The only reason Euros are accepting letting them come in is due to the fact they've lost their religion. They don't believe they have the divine right to exist, while Islam believes it has the divine right to conquer the world at all costs and by any means necessary.

>>11339718
>appears likely to be false.
I don't believe it appears likely to be false, I believe it appears to be true.

But even though it appears to be true, there will still be reasons to find doubts. You can find reasons to doubt anything though.

>true religion was designed
I think God created reality and religion formed for groups of people who want to acknowledge this and shape society accordingly

>>11339631
I personally don't think it's useful to qualify the extent of its influence, but to do so in the same vein as you have, to contrive examples: consider historically, the number of nations that have been theocracies, religion having been propagated through so-called holy books. The significance of literature is almost self-evident. And to directly address your Netflix example, consider how books have influenced pop culture creators, and how many Netflix shows are adaptations of texts.

>>11339140
Vocabulary.
Reading.
Familiarisation with literature in general (writing, tropes, styles, etc) and influences of many a work far and broad (outside of literature too) -- this is useful because it allows you understand many things others may like and thus engage in conversation/friendship. It's just being better educated on contemporary society and its important social pillars (entertainment media).
Feeling of uniqueness and superiority, which can be very useful depending on your life. Some may have tough lives, these feelings, even if childish and misplaced, provide drive, meaning, and identity.

>>11339738
So it's really important for people in positions of power to read books

Shiiiieeeeetttt

>>11339748
What do you think of these books that explain how people work, like "How to gain friends and influence people" or whatever it's called.

I read "Influence: Science and research" last year which was a compilation of studies on how people are influenced into thinking things. It had sales tactics and all kinds of stuff in it.

I don't even remember like 90% of what was in it now despite reading it, and I don't really think much of it was anything I could use in real life. Except the concept that simply phrasing things differently will make people comply with things. I use that at my sales job

>>11339771
>What do you think of these books that explain how people work, like "How to gain friends and influence people" or whatever it's called.
It can be insightful if you're relatively sheltered but if you follow it to a tee you will just be an insane sociopath.

>>11339728
>steven anderson
steven anderson is banned in multiple countries and spends entire sermons ranting about how men piss and is a holocaust denier. if you want to appear credible and refute claims fundamentalism is not a freak show stop following the one pastor more loony than westboro baptist.
for the uneducated heres the urinal freakout: https://youtu.be/GqLZKhJ1Zkk

>>11339728
also christianity is losing numbers in america and fundamentalism is virtually dead in europe

>>11339140
it makes you write good

>>11340986
>>11340992

Tons of Americans are banned from Europe for having the correct opinion. If anything, Anderson's ban list is only reflective of his growing power.

Europe is going to crumble before it's revived.

>more loony than westboro baptist
Time will only prove that the cartoonishly insane rhetoric of Fred Phelps was goofy, but mostly correct.

You are already seeing the American right-wing basically align with 70% of his views. Radical fundementalism is the only way forward for a radical future

>>11339715
Wow, I see you are a high art connoisseur with that picture saved on your computer. You are such a gentleman!

>>11341849
bug spotted

>>11341527
lol have fun wasting your life and having children that resent you for being retarded controlling dipshit
please stay in your containment board going forward

>>11339659
>everything I like is the biological, everything else, transcendental

Well this thread became a clusterfuck but I'll add my two cents.

Literature is first and foremost art. It's meant to convey the thoughts and emotions of the writer, and as a reader, you can think about said emotions and thoughts while also enjoying the book. Some books will make you laugh and feel joy and some others will make you sad and shit. Other books will challenge your views and others will just entertain you.
Secondly, literature can teach us a lot of things. You can learn what other periods of history were like, what the people felt and how they all got along. Literature can also teach you about yourself and it can help you become a better person.

That's why I love it, that's why I am studying it, and that's why I plan on teaching it.

>>11339140
almost anything is more beneficial than reading. talking to people, swimming, meditating, cooking, etc.

that being said, reading is fun and is better than scrolling through your social media or watching TV

>>11342503
HAHAHAHAHA

>>11342503
i agree being social and exercise
cooking is cool but no
and meditation is where you lost me

>>11339623
Sounds like you're really living by Jesus' teachings and turning the other cheek

>>11342839
I see you are quite proud of yourself using scripture against Christians despite not knowing what it is you're talking about.

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102010324

It's social capital among the educated and teaches you to write well.

>>11339221
Makes you realize there is more to life than those 3 things

>>11341527
>You are already seeing the American right-wing basically align with 70% of his views. Radical fundementalism is the only way forward for a radical future
Christianity is less relevant to the American right wing than it ever has been in recent history. Pastor Anderson is a novelty who /pol/ sometimes enjoys because he’s such a loony passionate firebrand. Most conservative and religious Americans, of any class, are not likely to be particularly sympathetic to him and his buffoonery.

>>11342147
>lol here's some strawmans and stereotypes haha I feel superior now

>>11342423
Everything we experience is spiritual and material

>>11343151
Religion will always be relevant to society and culture

The question is, which religion will it be?

>>11343389
stop posting pictures of yourself

>>11339430
Artists and performers finding out they could impress girls and that continuing on on a biological level is much more likely.
>on on

>>11343397
Chrislam

This thread helped me realize my literature addiction. I am not ok

>>11343397
probably dogmatic humanism

>>11341934
im definitely a bugman that just doesn't have the great appreciation you do for culture!

Conversation
Social gestering
Fucking english teachers