/lit/ - Literature

>>16856646
Yep. How have you not realized that antinatalism is a cope ugly people take solace in?
All of this dude's arguments are "I'm ugly and the world should cater to me, but since it doesn't the world is wrong."

>>16856730
Sounds like a lot of the posters on this board

>>16856646
Every worthwhile work of art is based on tragedy. That's enough to proof of the reality of this world.
Ligotti like most of the pessimists believe in the systematic philosophy of Schopenhauer.

>>16856752
>Every worthwhile work of art is based on tragedy
Don't you ever get bored of making incorrect sweeping statements?

>>16856730
>Yep. How have you not realized that antinatalism is a cope ugly people take solace in?
think again sweaty

>>16856646
>>16856752
yes, but this is not great work of art. He alludes to the same ideas in his story, but they involve a lot of cool and creepy shit. They are pretty great. I don't why he wanted to write this obvious, trite shit

>>16856764
>incorrect sweeping statements?
prove it

>>16856646
He was a Literary Researcher. Pretty sure he did back up his claims with sources available, like Zapffe. Look again.

>>16856730
nice ad hom

>>16856776
Cioran was an incel and that's why i like it so much

>>16856646
I don't care for Ligotti's work but there's nothing wrong with not backing up your claims. It's part of what makes Nietzsche such a powerful rhetorician. Leave the sourcing and referencing to the scientists and historians.

>>16857469
All of Ligotti's arguments are ad homs against happy and/or attractive people.

>>16856646
About 70% of the way through this now. It's really enjoyable, don't really get the hate on here. Maybe y'all haven't taste.

>>16857402
This is correct, anyone who has opened the actual book realizes he heavily cites his sources, and most of it is a compilation of such work.

>>16858578
Read Eugene Thacker's Infinite Resignation and Cosmic Pessimism too, both great

>>16856752
>Ligotti like most of the pessimists believe in the systematic philosophy of Schopenhauer.
No, pic related is from literally chapter one. Stop posting as you have no familiarity with the subject.

>>16856730
It's only thing they have. Why do you want to take it away?

>>16858616
In your own screencap he also says "Schopenhauer's is a great pessimism"

>>16858651
Yes, now continue on and tell us, what does the highlighted part say? Read it very slowly and really rack your brain over every word.

>>16856646
Literal an inferior Zapffe.

>>16858657
He's not satisfied with anything in life.
The whole point of the book is that nothing is sufficient.
I don't see why you are confused by this.

>>16858578
Laughing at this snippet. What ridiculous circular logic.

>>16858674
It's the same form of argument Nietzsche deployed on the Stoics: you cant say your thing is to be in conformity with nature, when anything you do is necessarily in your nature. This might be over your head, as not all of us are high-IQ geniuses like me and Ligotti and Nietzsche

>>16858665
There's clearly a lot of things you don't see, including a highlighted clause in an image.

>>16858616
I don't think you finished that sentence anon. Try reading past the highlighted text.

>>16857786
>Leave the sourcing and referencing to the scientists and historians.

>>16856752
He does not believe in the systematic philosophy of Schopenhauer, in fact, I believe that he didnt understand the theory of the will. Ligotti is part of the authors who believe the world is evil in the same sense that he believe that humans are evil, which is why is non-fiction writings sucks so hard.
You can notice that in the way he writes fiction too, his books have a great mid-game aura, but they always end like a cringe ass humanistic and infantile horror meme (aka stephen king kind of horror).

>>16856730
>antinatalism is just projection
always has been

>>16858850
everything is just projection

>>16856646
I haven't read the book so I can't comment on it.

>>16858862
not my unfettered love for harry dean stanton and female cleavage

>>16858768
Stop pretending to have read the book, you dumb bitch. Ligotti is not into Schopenhauer's systematic philosophy, only his pessimism. Here's yet another quote showing it.

>>16858690
>when anything you do is necessarily in your nature

But that's only true if you don't believe in free agency though, right?

>>16859129
How do you guys manage to be Essentialists and Aristotelians when you refuse to acknowledge Determinism?
It's sad

>>16858981
>Ligotti is not into Schopenhauer's systematic philosophy, only his pessimism.

Funny to think of it that way because with Nietzsche it was the other way around, kek

>>16858616
>>16858981
This is not a disagreement but a little critique. He mentioned the Will many times and quoted TWAWAR in the book.
>Ligotti is not into Schopenhauer's systematic philosophy, only his pessimism
The foundation of Schopenhauer's pessimism was his philosophy. The blind, dumb Will which is the source of suffering.

>>16857402
>>16858580
>he backs up his claims by citing some other hack writer that didn't prove shit
Cool logic.

>>16856730
I say we leave them alone.
Its either that or they discover biological Leninism. One is harmless the other is pretty scary.

>>16858578
Is this a book written by a high schooler? I mean, this kind of argument are the kind most people stop discussing around the age of 25 since the answer to them is obvious and irrelevant for adult life. Wtf is this doing in a bookshelf?

>>16860974
yeah every wretched literary motherfucker that ligotti referenced is a high schooler.
great argument.

>>16858578
Mega MEGA cringe

>>16860417
suffering born of fundamental empathy retard

>>16861040
Retard we're discussing Schopenhauerian philosophy.

>>16858578
the guy has zero IQ

>>16858674
>>16861020
>>16861110
high iq argumentation

>>16860974
>>16860974
>since the answer to them is obvious
>doesn't post the answer
EVERY. FUCKING. TIME
>and irrelevant for adult life
most of philosophy is irrelevant and impractical to adult life, your point? maybe we just like pondering things for the sake of it and you don't actually belong here? treat yourself to this link then
https://www.reddit.com/

>>16861153
It's no better than Ligotti's argument of the world doesn't treat me like a king so humans shouldn't exist.

>>16857306
I'll take "what is the burden of proof?" For 500$, Alex

>>16856752
>Every worthwhile work of art is based on tragedy
That’s because the whole purpose of art is to take suffering and to redeem it into something beautiful. Art is fundamentally a rejection of pessimism, it’s based of the inherently optimistic conviction that even the worst and most horrible aspects of human nature/existence can, by the power of the human mind/art, be transformed into something that invokes beauty and wonder and enjoyment, even if that enjoyment comes solely from relating to/sharing your woes.

>>16856730
>antinatalism is a cope ugly people take solace in

>>16856646
This book is great.
Incels silently agree, normalfaggots don't care, losers in denial start seething.
Which one are you?

>>16857671
Cioran was a polygamic chad who fucked his nurse in his wheelchair

>>16861705
Yeah, it's on you to prove Ligotti's statements are correct. Street is two-ways. You can't Dunning-Kruger yourself out of this one bucko.