/lit/ - Literature

>>17008657

>>17008657
Does Pinker have talks/lectures on YouTube?

>>17008688
What is stopping you from literally typing youtube.com into the address bar and finding out?

>>17008657
Joe at least talks to interesting people sometimes. And he knows how to talk to them.

Why do people hate Sam Harris? He seems ok.

>>17008724
He seems okay until you find out what a massive hypocrite he is. He was my gateway toward forming my own opinion on issues, I'll give him that though.

>>17008657
Who wins in their matchups?

>>17008657
is joe rogan really a public intellectual though? To me, he's just a bro who happens to have the other 4 on sometimes

>>17008657
Because back then intellectuals were french.

>>17008773
sadly yes he is extremely influential.

>>17008657
2/5 in the top voted in favor of being able to rape kids in france

0/5 in the bottom as far as i know

>>17008792
being influential and being an intellectual are not the same thing, Oprah is not an intellectual either

>>17008657
sam harris looks like a stock picture

>>17008657
But both these sets of people are/were retards

>>17008764
Chomsky vs Pinker would be the cure for Insomnia.

>>17008799
anglos really are dumber than shit kek. getting rid of the age of consent does not legalize pedophilia, but it's okay anglo, I wouldn't expect crude moralists to make use of their limited cognitive abilities, keep wallowing in your barren wasteland of anti-intellectualism, mass produced alienation and eternal submission.

>>17008792
He's not influential for his own ideas, he's a host that gets other people to talk about stuff. Calling him a public intellectual is honestly ridiculous.

>>17008657
What counts as "public" has changed, and that "public" prefers simplitude.

>>17008842
>the age of consent does not legalize pedophilia
Can you elaborate in this?

>>17008657
Also, writing used to be a fairly major art midways through the 20th century. It is not so today.

>>17008734
Not him but he was mine too but calling him a public intellectual when he's really just a political hack is why I don't think he should be up there.

>>17008657
surprisingly there are more pedos in the top row

>>17008880
there is nothing to elaborate lol, is raping an 18 year old legal? no

First the government dictates sexual practices, then it legalizes abortion, birth control, ART, and every other technique of procreation, then it allows surrogate pregnancies, selling your womb, your sperm, your ovaries, your kids. then they end up regulating the genetic constitution of your children. it never ends.

kill yourselves anglos, you guys are dumber than shit. literal slaves to capital, incapable of thought, spreading destruction everywhere they go, turning everything they touch into assets to be monetized. The AOE petition was pushed to stop the commodification of the body and biopolitics.

>>17008875
>he thinks the public chooses its figureheads
how ignorant can you be. these people are selected and promoted

>>17008932
what a fucking retard

>>17008792
he literally doesn't even have opinions hardly, he just finds shit interesting and wants to talk about it. he's an MMA guy and radio host like howard stern not an intellectual. but i can tell you're a goofy retard because i dislike him. he's just like ur average bro, semi normal chill dude. slightly smarter than average.

>>17008932
first they'll do X and then Y and EVEN Z?! unbelievable. where did you get your precognition powers?

>>17008932
You really did not reply to his post

>>17008943
Everything I've stated is historically correct.

Sensationalism has dimmed the anglo's capacity for reason. He is a slave to temporality, a passive vessel of systemic capitulation, a depthless receptacle for endless propaganda. There isn't a single anglo intellectual who has produced anything of worth, all of it is ulterior justification of change in material conditions. The anglo is reactive, like an automaton, he constantly readjusts himself to the current mode of production, which he cherish and praises above all else. He is entirely historical, an indistinguishable part of the eternal movement, a self-lubricating cog. The function of protestant moralism is cybernetic in essence, the substantiation of one's own existence. To be human is to be anything, but an anglo.

>>17009012
WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH NINE YEAR OLDS SLURPING ON YOUR DICK
i hate you motherfucking people

>>17008966
What is there to elaborate upon you buffoon?

>>the age of consent does not legalize pedophilia
>Can you elaborate in this?
? What? Elaborate on facts? I thought empiricism was the anglo's predilection.

Getting rid of the age of consent simply extend the capacity for consent to everyone no matter his age. It does not, in any way, legalize pedophilia. What more can I add? Is this an admission of the anglo's baffling idiocy? He cannot comprehend something as trivial as this?

>>17009020
It does not, only the perverted anglo sensationalist jumps to these vile conclusions. You're deranged.

The slav is the best read of any of those guys. Both in terms of he’s read the most widely (as well as being very well versed in classical music and film) and that reading his books is the most fun.

>>17009040
>Getting rid of the age of consent simply extend the capacity for consent to everyone no matter his age. It does not, in any way, legalize pedophilia
And how young do you think the capacity for consent extends anon?

>>17008932
Pedophilia is not just rape in the strict sense. If the child consents it's still pedophilia.

>>17008932
>raping kids is ok as long as the government doesn't complain about it
no

what's going on here

idk man scullys was pretty good

>>17008657
Reading standards have declined

>>17008657
because history ended 30-40 years ago

>>17008657
>Public intellectuals then: useless obscurantist nonsense
>Public intellectuals now: useless obscurantist nonsense
/lit/bros I've been thinking it's all a waste. Why don't you come join me in the pub instead? Everything has gone wrong since the dogma shifted from intelligent lads having a drink and bantering as they would in the symphosium, to writing and endowing everything with the sort of insufferable grandiosity and moral seriousness everpresent nowadays.

>>17010111
already odo this but i'm an alcohlolic now

>>17010111
based trips, let's go get that pint

with everything else degrading, why would public intellectuals improve?

>rogan
>intellectual
he's just a media personality who interviews academics on his show sometimes. at least the other ones you can make a case. rogan is a ufc dudebro who fried his brain with copious drug use. his role is just to smile, nod, agree, and say "whoa man...thats trippy" like a 14 year old taking a bong hit

>>17010178
Who isn't?

>>17010187
Let's go boys

>>17008657
Buckley got btfo hard by Vidal
>"Now listen, you queer, stop calling me a crypto-Nazi or I'll sock you in your goddamn face, and you'll stay plastered."

>>17010064
based and fisherpilled

>>17010456
That was Vidal getting btfo'd by Buckley.
On a serious note, calling people Nazis back then was much more important than it is now. If you were being called a Nazi, that meant you were being accused of working for the Nazis against the Americans, which is treason and a quite extreme accusation (working for the Nazis during WWII was a never substantiated but existent accusation against Buckley, which is why he reacted so poorly to being called a Nazi on a nationally televised program).

>>17010499
buckley was a retard on all those debates. all he could do was insinuate about vidal's sexuality whenever he couldn't think of a counter point.

petty little bitch behaviour.

>>17010430
>Who isn't?
I'm not an alcoholic I just abuse prescription pain medication

>>17010541
No different than Vidal. Both were Queens in love with the other.

>>17010456
That was pretty much the only moment where Buckley btfo'd Vidal and not the other way around.

>>17010582
I did that for a bit, it's simply way more boring than drinking, unless you have something really good. I liked Dilaudid but it gave me literal 2-3 day hangovers for some reason

>>17010598
A real shame they didn't get together, they would have been a power couple.

>>17009012
>these goofy, verbose proclamations
You hate to see it.

>>17008764
peterson vs derrida would be more fun (peterson obviously gets BTFO)

>>17008657

>>17010616
>boring
yes
>2-3 day hangovers
yes
>alcohol taste icky
yes

>>17008657
I wish we could go back to black and white cameras, i hate colors

>>17012069
if you have an android phone you can make it display only b&w. I don't use it as much now

They arent intellectuals, they are entertainers posturing as intellectuals.

>>17008724
he´s peak dunning krueger effect

>>17008764
Foucault solos all of the modern team

>>17008657
Trash then. Trash now. Face it, liberalism (including wannabe non-liberals like "I'm so extreme, I believe everything Joe Biden says but I want EVEN MORE welfare. Viva la revolucion!" and "I'm a slightly edgy Pat Buchanan") are incapable of propagating good thinkers. They push trash that fulfills certain market demands. The ones capable of any meaningful dialogue are ignored as either too impractical and unlikely, or censored because they pose a genuine threat to the rulers.

Culture, including in vogue intellectuals, is created in a dialectical process between the people and the mass-media. First there is some sort of desire for a certain type of thinker in the masses; next, the media gives attention to certain thinkers who meet that demand. They didn't really do anything to deserve their position, but the media elevates them to that status because they have no one else, and they're deemed a safe fit for the role. This process is also why the culture of the past few decades has this cheesy, surreal vibe to it. The 50's modesty, the disco, the 90's and 2000's edginess, and even something as recent as the 2016 Presidential campaign are now all seen as something almost non-real because we look back at them as silly. The reason they seem unreal is because they were largely constructed through the mass-media - it was fake.

>>17008764
Chompsky-Pinker
Foucault-Peterson
Derrida-Harris
Buckley-Rogan
literally who-zizek

round 2
Chompsky-zizek
Foucault-Derrida

extra round
Rogan-Derrida

finale
Derrida-Zizek

winner Zizek, modern intellectuals win.

>>17008932
You’re a dog. How does it feel?

>>17010402
Is his brain fried? He's redicuously successful, personable, extremely athletic, and he has a wife and kids.

>>17012276
This post reeks of psuedo

>>17012276
based and baudrillard-pilled

>>17008657
Joe Rogan knows how to hold a pen? or did he dictate it to Jamie?

>>17010499
He was skull and bones, same as the bush that worked with nazi financiers

What about Jocko Willink?

>>17008657

Because we only read the intellectuals from 50 years ago that were actually good. Everything else isn't republished.

>>17008657
because western iq has been declining since the 1870s and today it's on the level it was from the 1600s

the average person in britain would have an iq of 115+ if they were transported to britain in 2020

>>17013569
I'm not familiar with Baudrillard. How does that post relate to him?

>>17014363
>the average person in britain would have an iq of 115+ if they were transported to britain in 2020
The average person in Britain from what time?

>>17008934
The public validates them with audience views. Generating traffic is as important as promoting the right discourse, and since plenty of people will promote the various forms of the right discourse, who will make it big boils down to who has the ability to command large audience. Thus the point of the anon you're answering to is legitimate.

>>17010064
History ended when Napoléon won at Iéna.
t. Kojève

>>17008688
Ass

>>17008657
Zizek is more intelligent than everyone on that list.

>>17014363
The average person in Britain couldn't read in 1870 or 1600
Although, yes, you're right about the average upperclassman.

>>17009040
>Is this an admission of the anglo's baffling idiocy?
Got to admit that laws can be rather autistic and retarded. 17 year old dates his 16 year old girl friend and they like normal Americans have sex. then he turns 18 and magically he gets thrown in prison for it.

>>17010111
>Everything has gone wrong since the dogma shifted from intelligent lads having a drink and bantering as they would in the symphosium
Mfw never drank that much so always appeared to be the smartest guy in the pub. Had to flee town when everyone started writing, was hard enough keeping up with a stupefied intellectual.

>>17010402
>he's just a media personality who interviews academics on his show sometimes.
He's the extroverts idea of an intellectual. Part of his value is that he can get so many smart friends to talk to. This in turn benefits all intellectuals. He mostly talks with scientist though, not philosophers. A sign of the times perhaps. Rogan embodies the intellectuals talking at a pub.

>>17014626
That's not true. Every state has "Romeo and Juliet" laws to preclude that from happening by making it so that people within a couple of years of the person they are in a relationship with can't be thrown in jail.

>>17012276
>fulfills certain market demands. The ones capable of any meaningful dialogue are ignored as either too impractical and unlikely, or censored because they pose a genuine threat to the rulers.
Found Stefan molyneux anon.

>>17008932
BASED

>>17014685
>That's not true. Every state has "Romeo and Juliet" laws to preclude that from happening by making it so that people within a couple of years of the person they are in a relationship with can't be thrown in jail.
When did this occur? Make sure you're not coping so that you won't face the truth. What if his girlfriend was breaking up with him or his mother, who I believe was the one that had this actual human being thrown in prison for this, said the right things to make it not appear as a "Romeo and Juliet" scenario? I hope you're right though, laws and judicial system have a long way to go before they are perfect.

>>17008672
Fpbp

>>17008792
>influential is the same as being intellectual
Bro do you even read? Do you just look at the first two letters and then check the suffix to see if the word??
Words are a glorious tool through which we can precisely communicate the ideas we dream and you just shit all over that notion.

>>17014733
Just look at this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_the_United_States
Over half of states (somewhere around 26, last I checked) has a law that allows an age gap of 2-4 years. In about 3-5, it's merely a misdemeanor to have sex with an age gap of 2-4 years. However, in the remaining 15-20 states, yeah, it is a felony (albeit a less punished felony). Most of those states are poorer states.

>>17008657
>Foucault
>Buckley
>Bertrand Russell
Top row is somehow even more cringe then the bottom row.

>>17014555
the average british person in 1870 would have an iq of 115 in britain in 2020

>>17014614
this is some midwit level attempt at refutation
literacy rates in 1870 among men and women in britain were 90%
literacy rates arent indicative of iq either, the iq of the average briton today is the same as that in the year 1600 regardless of literacy

>>17014833
>literacy rates in 1870 were 90%
That depends on what you mean by "literacy." I would guess that what was meant was "literacy at an elementary school level," considering that secondary schools didn't exist for anyone other than the rich until the early 20th century
>literacy rates aren't indicative of iq either
A significant amount of an iq test requires you to read and write. If you can't read and write, you probably can't even do much of it.
As for higher level literacy and education, large swathes of iq tests (such as mathematics and logical reasoning) require at least some formal education to do well on (unless you are a master autodidact or something).

>>17014877
pedantic retard tier sophistry about true literacy, irrelevant
>large swathes of iq tests (such as mathematics and logical reasoning)
the fuck are you talking about? iq tests are designed to test your aptitude in verbal, mathematical and spatial intelligence and not rely on previous formal education
you obviously havent done an iq test before but theyre designed to test pattern recognition ability

iq tests measure the g factor and you can extrapolate what the iq would have been in britain in 1870 based on a multitude of factors, and in comparison to 2020, they were an entire standard deviation more intelligent in raw g, regardless of literacy
https://www.amazon.co.uk/At-Our-Wits-End-Intelligent/dp/184540985X
i suggest you read a book about the subject before trying this midwit level refutation of trying to equate intelligence with education

>>17008773
As much as Joe likes to say he's a bro, he is extremely well-read and likely has a >120 IQ (top 10 percent of all humans). Social intelligence is actually very dynamic; social geniuses like Donald Trump or Joe Biden often end up in positions of power.

>>17009050
>The slav is the best read of any of those guys.
Yes, this is a true statement.

>>17008657
I'm not sure where to start. First off the public is generally not very intelligent so I tend to ignore the people they appoint as an "intellectual". Some of the people whom you've listed have books that aren't even in print, that should tell everyone how fucking rediculous this shit is.

>>17008724
his pHd is fake, funded by daddy
his intellect is fake, funded by insecure retards on youtube

JBP is most non-pseud on this list, altough don't know Zizek very well

>>17008842
Found the Vaush fanboy.

>>17010111
based

>>17008657
I refuse to believe anyone on the planet whether it's a boomer dude or a gen Alpha girl considers Joe Rogan an intellectual.

>>17015229
What is it that allows for a man to make 100 million dollars by doing what they do?

Even PewDiePie could be considered to be an intellectual. Life for intellectuals is no longer only about writing books. Let us then make a distinction between intellectuals and geniuses. Genius is something above the level of a public intellectual. Each person is a multitude of things in various capacities.

>>17014603
and he hasn't written anything of value, so that should give you an idea of how much shit are intellectuals

>>17015252
>PewDiePie could be considered to be an intellectual. Life for intellectuals is no longer only about writing books
PewDiePie has a book though

>>17015239
Being a proper reflection of the hoi polloi and having a sound business sense, plus support and/or reliable business partners.

>>17014766
I especially picked a variety of intellectuals to show that however you look at it, they were superior to the shit we get today.

>>17008842
Nonce

>>17015398
Some people think that he only pretends to be a dumbass meathead. It's funny that every once in awhile you see intelligent people surprised at the questions Joe asks. It's pretty sad that a lot of the mainstream media doesn't have much substance to it anymore. when I turn on the news to watch it is usually about covid-19, Trump or some BLM thing. Joe partially fills a void for people that want something more than what is common. 4chaners tend to be disagreeable and pretentious which is why "midwit" is a preferred insult. You have to have an IQ of 180 just to impress these fucks. It speaks to their elitism, to their nobility. It's why we have captchas, because we must solve a problem before we may be worthy to post.

>>17015391
>PewDiePie has a book though
Of course he does, it doesn't mean that he won't do anything else. If some of the past greats were alive today don't you think you would love to watch their YouTube channel as well? Reading is a great pleasure and is extremely useful for some forms of thought. Writing a book can help to express all the thoughts in your head. But so too can things like dialogue with others and this can be put in podcast and video format. The Great's do not exist in a vacuum. I too wonder where the truly Great Men of our times are, if anyone finds one make sure to tell others. They deserve to be popular, and if they can't be popular perhaps those of us that crave them may at least discover them.

If Joe Rogan is not an intellectual in himself he is at least a man capable of introducing us to intellectuals. I can't shit on him because he at least provides a platform fo people like Jonathan Haidt. If Joe loses the ability to give a platform to interesting people I will have considered him to be absorbed into the multitude of nothing special.

>>17015660
Perhaps he does, if so, it's a smart act, but it doesn't really make him an intellectual.
Pretty sure the reason we have captcha is for avoiding being spammed by bots (plus to pay our data tithe to our coming AI overlords but that, we do it for free).

>>17008764
All of the top wins except for maybe Peterson against Foucalt and Zizek against Russel. Not necessarily because they're more "genius" or historically important, but just because they sometime can have sounder views. I honestly don't think this many years of Peterson's contemplation over Foucalt's power-philosophy can be denied to give him a great advantage.

>>17010111
I love honest rejection of intellectuallisation. Philosophy is good, but if you miss the point of life who cares?

>>17015252
>Each person is a multitude of things in various capacities.
Cringe Humian autist that doesn't even know he exists.

>>17015749
What would you define the 'point of life' as? I'm calling it for hedonism.

>>17015744
Peterson is egregiously bad as a philosopher. If you're literally read anything by Nietzsche you'll see that his interpretations are basically just him giving his usual spiel and making random connections to the text.

I actually agree with Peterson's political views and his ideas in general but to call him a good thinker is an insult to actual scholars.

>>17015780
>Peterson is egregiously bad as a philosopher.
Intellectual is not necessarily a philosopher. Peterson is a little too practical to do proper philosophy.

>>17015755
>Cringe Humian autist that doesn't even know he exists
Don't know what you talkin about. to have the capacity to be yourself doesn't mean that I don't exist. ;/

>>17008657
>all white men
I'm thinking based

>>17008688
I'm not sure his Little St. James lectures actually got recorded

Stop forcing this fucking William Buckley as an intellectual figure. Dude was nothing but a pompous hack.

>>17016056
Now listen, you queer, stop calling me a crypto-Nazi or I'll sock you in your goddam face, and you'll stay plastered

>>17008688
You can find some talks of his on the YouTubes.