/lit/ - Literature

Because we get a lot of morons from /pol/ and /r9k/ who come here and think we can help them turn their miserable lives around. I wish the mods would step up and delete those sorts of threads, we're not 4chan's therapist.

When you began conflating /lit/ with your preconceived personifications of the individuals which comprise it.

>>11512854
Philosophy is self help. Sometimes in larger scale.

>>11512859
I’ve noticed contrived analyses of the lobster king here, with people occasionally comparing him to philosophers like Nietzsche.
I don’t think JP intends to be scrutinized like this, or even to be seen as an original thinker. His message is a basic and pragmatic one that serves merely to give direction towards people who are misguided today. He’s excellent at it, but there’s no reason I can perceive for him to receive scholarly analysis.

>>11512869
>Philosophy is (just a) self help

>>11512869
I agree to a degree. The main reason I love philosophy is because it transforms people by granting them far greater worldviews. JP, and other self help gurus, focus moreso on habits. Philosophy brings you to profound understandings that you wouldn’t have likely found on your own, whereas self help directs your attention to what you already know needs to be done.

>>11512871
He's deeply resented by the average 4channer for, more or less, a singular reason; he provides them with simple solutions, derived from genuine expertise in the field of literature and philosophical theory, to simple problems. Clean your room, set your house in order, consider your own capacity for evil, consider that you are fallible, etc.

Being informed, demonstrably, that while your problems are not solely your doing, they are solely your responsibility, is a painful thing to come to terms with for people who've spent their lives shirking responsibility off onto "other" groups such as extremist leftists and Jews and conservatives.

>>11512888
I wonder (((who))) is behind this post.

>>11512888
We also hate him because he's fucking spammed everywhere and we're sick of it. He's basically the /lit/ version of My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic.

>>11512888
Thanks for your insight. It rings true to me as I’ve had conversations with all of the groups you mentioned where, after they finish telling their conspiracies, I ask what needs to be done. They always give the same response that nothing can be done, and we might as well just have fun while we’re around. Even before finding JP, I wasn’t inclined towards extreme leftism and conservatism because that answer disturbed me. It doesn’t justify them spending most of their time concerning these conspiracies.
Have you ever defended JP amongst these types?

>>11512941
>Have you ever defended JP amongst these types?
It's quite difficult, as a result of the vast majority of individuals who take a staunch "Anti-Peterson" position do not actually understand that virtually everything he says is a repetition of great works by great people. And that his simplifications of the philosophies and revelations of Nietzsche, Jung, Freud, goethe, Stirner, The Biblical Texts, etc; are the sub-structures of the professions he makes about the nature of Being and of consciousness.

When arguing that "everything Peterson says is bullshit" they're not arguing against Peterson, they're arguing against a simple, straight forward repetition of logical conclusions of the presuppositions and propositional logic developed by the greatest philosophical minds of the past 5 thousand years. Which itself indicates they have no experience with any of the serious philosophical and ethical quandaries that still exist, and existed in the past.

>>11512869
That's similarly reductive to saying math is self help

>>11512869
Sometimes it is. The stoics and existentialists are glorified self-help writers.

>>11512878
Philosophy is self-help for people who don't need self-help--and the kind of people who need self-help can't read philosophy.

>>11512986
Please provide examples of Stirner's influence on JP, full quotes.

>>11513046
Is that a serious question, or would you permit me to simply laugh at you in response?

>>11512986
Kinda straw-manny, here, tripfag.

>repetition of great works by great people.
Repetitions outside of context or without clear justifications for recontextualization are simply misrepresentations. Nietzsche said this that and the other thing, but none of it matters if you don't properly represent why he was saying it. JP, like most public intellectuals, sucks at this.

>simplifications of the philosophies and revelations of Nietzsche, Jung, Freud, goethe, Stirner, The Biblical Texts,
"Simplifications", only if you mean pointedly ideological misrepresentations. There's a lot out there showing that he essentially rapes Jung, despite professing to know the most about him.

>"everything Peterson says is bullshit"
A broken clock is right twice a day. You'd have to ask, though, why you're digging around for gold in a trash heap. People who conflate marxism and postmoderism just aren't thinking through things properly.

>maps of meaning
>No mention of semiotics
>Dude my book talks about how meaning is made it's deep and insightful
>Dude archetypes and myths lol
>Dominance-hierarchy
What pisses me off is he is in a position of authority in his field and has done absolutely nothing to contribute to the science. This isn't uncommon for tenured professors, what pisses me off is how he is so famous for being a psued imposter. Even his critics don't call him out for his shitty acedemic work and he is counting on that.

>>11513049
I'm serious, I have never considered reading JP because he seemed like a 'fast-food philosopher'. I get that he appeals to a wider audience, but why should I read him when I have the true geniuses at my disposal? Post non-meme quotes please.

>>11513066
>neo-marxism = postmodernism
>Foucault grudge
>jungian archetypes are knowable

10 minutes on wiki and you can undo everything he's said publicly

>>11513051
>Repetitions outside of context or without clear justifications for recontextualization are simply misrepresentations.
Well, that's neither what he is doing or what I stated I believed he was doing.

>ideological misrepresentations.
That's a patently absurd and plainly purposeful mischaracterization. And you'd know that clearly if you had any real experience with the literature from which he draws to construct his lessons.

>People who conflate marxism and postmoderism just aren't thinking through things properly.
And here we arrive at the crux of the poverty of comprehension. Anyone on this board, I'm sure, could explain to you the two presuppositions which found the basis of the economic philosophy of Marx; the first being that individuals are representative first as subsumed members of a collective group identity, and the second being that those groups are foremost oppressors, or oppressed.

All that is required to transfigure the economic element into an instantiation of cultural social philosophy (Cultural Marxist) as the social constructionists have done, is to first adhere to the proposed solutions of post-modernist theorizing to the issue of infinite interpretation potential of finite data. Which, if you're not familiar with, you shouldn't be discussing these subjects.

>>11512869

>>11512986
But by that logic near every philosopher today cannot be criticized in any side because they also learned the exact same one.
Isn't that a shitty excuse for defending peterson.

>>11512941
>They always give the same response that nothing can be done, and we might as well just have fun while we’re around.
Literally who says this? Lefties want FALC and conservatives want the 60s paintings back

>>11513096
There's plenty to criticize in Peterson's approach and in his methods. But that's not what /lit/, or 4chan as a whole for that matter, actually does. They attack his character as weak, and his ideas as frail and brittle. Which, demonstrably, they are not.

You may be contending with the logical conclusion of the works of Nietzsche, say, simplified and distilled. But you're still contending with Nietzsche. And good luck to you if you wish to be taken seriously in comparison to a man like that.

>>11513084
>individuals
no.
>oppressors, or oppressed
Actually, no. But you've done well to simply repeat what JP says about this. Capitalism is much more complicated than a dualistic power struggle. Not even Foucault argued this. Positions of power are fungible based on strategic positioning. Try harder.

>transfigure the economic element into an instantiation of cultural social philosophy
Why do you write like you're in high school? Why do you choose to misrepresent the idea that the economic is already social and vice versa?

Obvious troll is obvious.

>>11513108
I can smell your uneducated pseudo-intellectual sweat from here, stinky.

>>11513106
Thank you for providing that Petersen is a hollow shill that only passes on other people's ideas.

>>11513113
Excellent

>>11513106
>simplified and distilled
twisted and strawmanned are better word choices

>>11513104
Evola

>>11513114
>They attack his character as weak, and his ideas as frail and brittle.

How does a guy helping losers get so much hate?
Who cares if he Properly Understands post marxian neo dialectical modernism, what a gay bunch of shit to squawk about.

>>11513010
Isn’t it?