/lit/ - Literature

2/36

3/36

I love how Ecco wrote an entire book on FUCKING LISTS.

4/36

5/36

who the fuck takes 36 pictures of their books

6/36

College: People reading the same shit into eternity.

7/36

seemed like a good idea. blazed out of my mind.

8/36

9/36

you're probably questioning your sex, you're young, you're unemployed, and you live with your parents.

>doesn't have bookshelf
>has two small stacks of books
>thinks no one can compete

>>1717101

i do have bookshelves: 10/26

That's a damn fine collection right there, sir.

11/26

>about to get pissed at you for the books in your first image
then
>Frege: Philosophy of Language

So I guess we're bros.

You're either a grad student or professor of philosophy (if not, you've got one hell of a philosophy hobby going on).

I'd guess you're either dissertating or a young prof- 28-32.

Most philosophers are men so I'll play the odds and say you're male.

Holy crap, where do you live, OP?

>>1717111

not a grad student, nor a professor.

13/26

14/36

>>1717114

Okay... unemployed, independently wealthy, FORMER grad student? It is a bad job market, after all.

15/36

>>1717116

actualy just got accepted this term into grad programs. haven't been a grad student ever before; will be starting in the fall. and yeah i'm male, and relatively young.

16/36

17/36

>>1717120

I'm a grad student already and you're scarily more well read than me. But at least you're a grad-student-to-be. If you were an accountant or something I would have been super depressed.

So unless your funding is super hot, how are you going to fit all those books into a tiny, tiny bachelor apartment?

18/36

>>1717126

wow this was a stellar call. i've been doing corporate tax returns as an accountant for the last several months.

where are you in grad school, and for what?

19/36

20/36

21/36

hottest set of pictures ever on 4chan.
ever.

22/36

>>1717130

I'm a philosopher as well. From a Secret Place.

>>1717137

never said i was a philosopher.

23/36

24/35 (didn't like one shot)

>>1717140

What the hell do you study, then? Who would subject themselves to Dummett that isn't a philosopher?

27/36

>>1717143

will be studying law.

28 outta whateva

29/36

30

>>1717101

that enough bookshelves for you?

Oh, close enough then.

Do you actually like law? You clearly seem to like philosophy, and lots of philosophers struggle with the choice between the two.

last one just cause

you should see my movie collection.

>>1717152

i don't particularly like law; i applied to, and was admitted to, several PhD programs in philosophy and/or law. i literally detest the current state of american philosophy: i chose law both as a pragmatic alternative and as a topic that could perhaps underwrite my own interest in political philosophy.

>>1717137

are you from a "good" graduate program?

Which Volume of Strategies of War is that?

I've read 2 and 4 but that's because those are the only two copies I can pirate on the internet.

You are 27 or 28 years old.

>>1717184

are you talking about the robert greene? there is only one volume (33 strategies of war) as far as i know....

>>1717175

nope

>>1717187

You're 22 going on 23.

>>1717188

i'm turning 22 in may.

>>1717160
>i literally detest the current state of american philosophy

Why?

Would you consider your left or right wing?

>>1717187
awe well, I just noticed I was thinking of Roots of Strategy series, not Strategy of War.

http://www.amazon.com/Roots-Strategy-Bk-Thomas-Phillips/dp/0811721949/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=130
3452640&sr=8-1

You're large around the middle.

>>1717198
It depends on the wind direction.

your parents pay your rent.
amirite?


and also I DO want to see your film collection, very much.

>>1717198

it very much depends on the issue. but, my problems with the american philosophical landscape are beyond political divide--i usually don't really care for/participate in problems reducible to the liberal/conservative divide. i think that the problems american philosophy faces are far more fundamental than this, and are in fact what demarcate and perpetuate the illusion of a simple "dual" political framework.

>>1717203

no, i'm not. i work out 4 times/week.

>>1717206

they don't pay my rent.

as far as movies go, here they come.

there are 300+ more downstairs, i just am too lazy to go down right now.

>>1717220

If you could recommend only 3 philosophy books to someone OP, what would they be?

>>1717220
THEN HOW CAN YOU AFFORD ALL THIS?

I'm so envious.

>>1717225

a presocratics reader (anaximander, parmenides, democritus, herakleitos, anaxigoras, thales, etc.)
Hegel--toss up between science of logic and phenomenology of spirit
wittgenstein--philosophical explinations

>>1717225

then again, if i had to choose 1 work period it would be king lear by shakespeare.

Hurry up and tell us what you do for a living, OP!

>>1717094
oh my, what an adorable Zizek collection.
I'm watching a Pervert's Guide to Cinema AS I TYPE THIS.

Are you a Lacanian?
or a Marxist?
or maybe just a Hegellian?

Or is Zizek just too charming to pass up?


Also, how many books would you estimate, are in your collection?
Of these, how many have you read?

>>1717231

>mfw

How much shakespeare have you read?

>>1717227

independently wealthy.

apart from the books/movies, my main expense is living, food, and recently bought a bentley. i couldn't resist. gonna go take some photos of that bad boy right now. and toke a bit more. be back soon.

you jelly?

>>1717237

literally all. simply the most extroadinary poetical mind that has ever written; you can call hamlet highschool, i just don't care. king lear is the single most powerf statement of mankinds being.

>>1717238
howwwww.
you're fucking 21.

you seem like such an asshole, but I see Ecrits, and I just want to hug you.

>>1717236
i am VERY divided by this issue, and have been asked this a number of times. I am more hegelian than marxist and/or lacanian, and mainly find zizeks style an obstacle to his work rather than its merit. i was in 2 graduate seminars with zizek as an undergrad, so i actually know the man personally as well--he is insufferable to talk to.

>>1717245

yeah see i'm not an asshole. i like being hugable though :-P

>>1717240

Fucking hell, I wish I had that much free time. Know any verse off by heart?

>>1717249

yes, of course, though if i were to write it here it would be impossible to know whether or not it was really my memory or if it were derived from some google search, so i'll just refrain...

>>1717253

Ha, I wasn't expecting you to recite over the internet. Just curious, I've been learning sonnets recently.

OP are you a security guard? I ask because this would give you enough time to read all of these books.

>>1717255

the sonnets are wonderful; do you have a favorite play/sonnet?

>>1717248
>>1717246
What.
The urge to hit/hug you is growing stronger.
Where did you go to school?
I could totally see Zizek being difficult to talk to. I mean, I can imagine him being an asshole, plus the language barrier, speech impediment, wonky eye...

What's your favorite from Hegel?

How do you feel about William James?

>>1717256

no i'm just "independently wealthy", whatever you want that to mean...

though, just to do something, i've been doing corporate tax returns for the last 3 months. for the most part, i read in the evenings/stay up late.

>>1717258

hold up i wanna talk to you i just really got to smoke. maybe play starcraft, too. i'll come back here first. brb.

>>1717257

131, of course 18 and Winter's Tale/Othello

>>1717266
Ha.
I'll wait around because I'm so goddamned interested(/JEALOUS).

>>1717268

winter's tale is the shit. i've never really been captured by othello, beyond iago (who remains the plays saving character for me). actually got to see the free "shakespeare in the park" in central park over the summer with al pacino playing the shylock in merchant of venice. fucking bad ass as shit.

what draws you to othello?

>>1717271

Iago, Iago and more Iago. Also the whole play's so damn dramatic and tense the whole way through a production. Also the theme of pride/reputation being the downfall characters in the play.

>>1717271

Also, jealous of Pacino.

Luckily I live about 30 minutes from Stratford though. Jelly?

>>1717266
Did you go to school in Chicago?

>>1717286
Or Columbia, or Princeton, or NYU?

back. G13 and arjan haze salad. good stuff. try it. took a picture of ma bentley. just cause. bored out of my MIND.

>>1717286

nope. i was born in washington, DC, went to boarding high school in NH, went to college in NJ, transferred to college in Boston, kicked out to finish in college in NY, where i took a year of living abroad in oxford (england) and paris. currently live in palo alto, CA. no joke. never been to chicago. heard mixed things, and uchicago is a fantastic school, though hyde park may hold a less flattering reputation...

>>1717297

Well, you're a very lucky man.

>>1717289

never studied at columbia, though i've hung out there a shitton; started at princeton and ended at NYU. really good calls--how'd you know? you know me IRL?

>>1717297

Now I'm mad jelly OP. Seriously though you must be one of the best read people on /lit/

>>1717301
Maybe. . . No, I'm fucking with you, there's no way we've ever met ever.
These are just Universities that I know have entertained Zizek as a lecturer.
I used my keen deductive skills from there.

>>1717305

thanks man, appreciate it. i basically hated high school and my first 2 years of college, so i made rodin's "thinker" my model and spent 6 years doing nothing but reading. felt good, man. spent very little time in class to get that education...

have you sacrificed much "real-life experience" to accomplish allll this reading?

>>1717310

yeah dude i graduated early from NYU last semester; i was in his seminar with avital ronnel "theory clashes: the persistence of the theological-political". Zizek's style is insufferable; skipped virtually every class only to get an email from ronnel at the end personally congratulating me on my submitted term paper. best feelings, man: when you beat out all those pretentious little hipster snobs who spend 50k/semester not in an effort to dwindle near the threshold of some new knowledge, but on some coke and haffa bottle of jack, then yeah, bragging about it feels pretty damn good.

so, kids, the moral: read more; go to class less; dominate.

i am very, very high right now, so i apologize if this hasn't been articulated quite as well as i would otherwise hope...

>>1717317
You make me sad to not know you.

That you skipped out on his class really impresses me. Most of my friends would strangle kittens to be in the same room with him.

What did you major in?

>>1717316

not at all. i've lived in 4 of the worlds premier cities, skipped a shitton of class, spent entire weeks not reading, etc. spent a lot on the dionysian outlet, too; i've travelled and continue to travel, and have a significant other who i've been with for 6 years. "real life" experience is the paramount form of "learning," i think, though the frameworks of knowledge i've encountered through my reading has literally altered my perception of what reality is/how it functions, thus altering, i think, a certain valence of my being. so while real-life experience is always a priority, i still think that the experience of interpreting different frameworks can literally alter the perspective one has in relation to reality. it's interesting to try on different masks after you've read foucault, bourdieu, baudrillard, marcuse, adorno, etc; it's entertaining to strategically (machiavelli, sun-tzu, nietzsche) orient speech-acts to (re)direct the flow of discursive power (austin, cavell, wittgenstein, derrida, goffman, etc); in a word, its awesome to simply dominate, or at least to retain the potential to do so.

after a while, it's just a matter of connecting the dots; it sorta just falls into place after that...

OP, could you please become a trip-user? I'd gladly read anything you posted after reading through what has thus far been posted by you in this thread.

>>1717331

a trip-user? thanks man i appreciate the compliment, though i don't really know how to weigh it

>>1717334
How often do you come here and is this the only board you visit?

>>1717326
and you're 21? seriously?
you turn 22 early in may?

you seriously should become a trip-user. there are lots of people who you could positively influence just by posting. myself included.

>>1717238
Damn it OP, I'm so jelly. And kind of in love. Tell me you're a douche bag irl.

What does independently wealthy even mean?!

>>1717334
If you do trip I vote that your name should be Mr. Claus because it feels like fucking Christmas right now.

>I HOPE SOMEBODY IS SCREEN CAPTURING THIS.

>>1717339

not super often; i've come several times and generally liked what i'd seen. sometimes i get wallpapers from wg, and occasionally check b for the lolz. how come?

guys whats a trip poster and what does said position do?

>>1717347
just adopt a pseudonym instead of posting anonymously.
that way we can soak up your apparently infinite wisdom.

>>1717342

i come from a very wealthy family; at 16 my brother died, leaving me his wealth; at 17 began trading with said inheritance; invested well. profited. spent most of my time reading, so i could play the stock game the way its meant to be played--with a consideration of the human element intrinsic to its structure. the non-linear dynamic models always factored out the very fallible human mind that created even its supposed transcendent facade of judgment; you get to know the human element through philosophy and poetry, you get to rule the world. simple as that boys.

>>1717349

how do i do that? just type in a name?

>>1717344
You just seem kind of unfamiliar, but that's probably for the best. I am glad to know that you visit my home board of /b/. It is minds like yours that we need there, my liege.

>>1717366
In the name field you type your desired name, and then to be a tripfaggot (tripfag, tripfriend, trip user, whatever) you must type an octothorpe (#) or two and then any string of numbers or letters or symbols. That will generate a static 'trip code' after your name that only you will know how to create, thus preventing others from passing themselves off as you.

>>1717367

dude i posted on /b for the first time the night obama was elected; i was banned inexplicably for 3 days. i've never posted there since.

>>1717372
Yeah, there are no rules there except a few of the global rules. Mods can do whatever the fuck they want. Haven't you seen those screencaps of people getting banned for saying they preferred white milk over chocolate milk?

did it work?

>>1717374

they deserved it

>>1717377
You are now the only tripfag I like. Screen capping now as reference for others if you post and they don't know your credentials.

>>1717375
eyyyy, thank you!

>>1717381

thanks man i like you, too.

What kind of music do you listen to?

if the kid in grad school is still here, what are you studying?

>>1717387
This is a god-tier question.
Also what is your favorite color?

>>1717390
and birthday?

>>1717387

currently listening to a remastered version of time of the season--the zombies; next up is black dog--led zeppelin; and after that is hotel california--the eagles. but i listen to a lot of modern rock/alternative (red hot chili peppers, nirvana, radiohead, blink 182 (fuck off i like them), etc), classic rock (pink floyd, the who, queen) and rap (eminem's tone and lyricism rivals good poetry, in my opinion). you?

>>1717395

green

>>1717390

may 26

you the same guy as above? what's your story?

check it ima start a new thread

>>1717397
Well i just thought that such well-educated person would probably enjoy 20 century academists like Stockhausen, Xenakis or Lachenmann. Not to say that listening to pop music is bad thing, just wondering.

presumably by "better" collection you mean more pretentious?

hurr durr look how refined i am.

what is your primary motivation for reading books

why do you read so go damn much, what the hell is the point

>>1717068

Hey OP. You sound like a real cool guy. I plan on ending up like you once I'm older. (18 yo senior, yo)

How much did you inherit from your brother and how did you invest it? I plan on doing some investing and I'm doing some research now. What did you go to college for?

Can you expand more on this idea of reading philosophy and poetry to start winning? Very interested.

Pretentious pseudo-intellectual hipster who reads postmodern bullshit and pretends he understands it without actually applying it to anything?

Fucking wanker.

>>1717517

that seems to be an unfair assessment. why do you say that?

>>1717517

U JELLY BRO ?

>>1717517
Proof that no matter how much a person reads, someone will still call him a pretentious pseudo-intellectual hipster.

If we did a word count for /lit/, I wonder how high those words would rank?

>>1717540
Have you looked at the pictures? Most of the books look like they have never even been opened before.

OP, I rarely admit that I may be in the presence of my betters, especially when they haven't accomplished anything of note, but I think I may be ready to do so.

I blame my relative lack of erudition on having to fend people off with concrete deeds when it seems like I'm "going nowhere". I've read maybe half as much as you, but honestly probably closer to a third but I tell no one. If they know they will only question why I'm sitting around reading "useless bullshit" on my scholarship when I should be getting out of grad school ASAP to get some researcher job. You seem to have "fuck you"-money... would you agree that's the reason you can do this without taking breaks? (I worked for a year and a half as an adjudicator, hard job, little time for abstract thinking after work, no reading got done) For example, your long-term girl, wouldn't she be on your ass even a bit if she didn't know you had shit covered because you can just buy a fucking Bentley if you feel like it? I've been with the same girl for 4 years myself, and while she loves me to death, she sometimes hints that she doesn't "get" the whole disdain for formal qualifications thing and wants me to get a job so we can be "normal".

Uh... anyway OP, I salute you.

>>1717562
He isn't better than you. You've only wasted half as much time as he has.

>>1717568
We're all wasting time; I just regard his way as relatively beneficial. Which is why I've chosen it, but due to circumstances I have only been able to devote half as much time to it.

/lit/ truely is pathetic. Worshipping some guy who, by absolute chance, acquired enough capital to purchase more material worth for himself. Some guy who appears to have sectioned himself off from the world so that he can increase his Goodreads 'read books' number and come to a message board to brag about it.

Although, I can see why he chose this place to brag, given how you're all lapping it up.

>>1717583
Those of us who are in (hopefully only slight) awe are in awe of the (supposed) knowledge this person has accumulated at such a young age. The (perhaps flimsy) proof of this is in material things, yes, and that is a bit troubling, but it's an interesting thread regardless.

This thread reminds me of how many people far smarter than me exist.

>comes onto a website consisting primarily of people living with their parents with no responsibility, fiscal or otherwise
>posts book collection, expects "OMFG OP I LOVE YOU"
>gets it

you're all cunts, without exception.

>>1717611
enjoy your shit life

>>1717609
Not smarter. Just better at having questions.

I might be the only one who feels this way, but vast accumulation of knowledge of every philosophy, history, theory, and fiction just doesn't impress me, at least not on any real level. If anything I'm in awe of OP's time management skills and persistence. At some point, however, it seems to cease being a search for enlightenment and starts being some form of obsession in the task, like CEOs who make money not for sustenance but for the pure enjoyment of making money. It's no longer a means to an end, it's just a means. Congrats on your collection, though, OP. It really is impressive.

"What a scholar one might be if one knew well only some half a dozen books."
-Flaubert quoted by Nabokov

>>1717613

thanks :x

ITT: some people have more money than others

whoopee fucking do.

Sage for books as trophies.

op, tell me where to start philosophy

>mfw dat collection.

How many books are there? Do you know? It's gonna be a bitch to move them across the country, if you ever decide to.

I am very envious of your apparent situation in life. You have a bitch, books and a bentley. Enjoy it while it lasts, if not for your own, then for our sakes'.

The OP appears to want to talk more about his material possessions than about all of these books he's supposedly read.

Given that I just opened three random images and only a couple of books in each show signs of being read, I doubt this guy is actually that well-read.

>>1717647
People are asking him about his material possessions and his life, so why wouldn't he talk about them?

Also, just because his books aren't demolished doesn't mean he hasn't read them. I also take care of my books.

inb4 this is D&E in disguise

someone post d&e's red shelf

>>1717677
Old pic or new?

>>1717679
both please :)

listen to the new Jagga Jazzist.

That's a good number of books, but how many were actually worth reading??

this is an embarrassing thread for our board

>>1717709
Yeah, but what do you expect. As much as we like to think it, this isn't /phi/losophy. It's a gathering of book nerds.

>>1717616
If you enjoy making money just to make money, it becomes an end in itself not a means. You have ended there. A means is an instrument to something. I think what you're trying to say is that it's retarded to do something that is instrumental by nature as an ends. I agree with that essentially. Not in this case however, but I don't feel like arguing that so I'll just say your mother shot heroin into her clitoris while she had you in her womb.

>>1717709
Haha yeah, he doesn't even listen to real music or watch real cinema

>>1717709
explain

>>1717709

hey browngay, maybe this thread will be more to your liking: >>1717662

funny how I've never seen a tripfag do anything even remotely as helpful/productive/selfless as this

i think trips should only be allowed on condition that the user do something like this once a week, like type up something of interest that's hard to find and turn it into an e-book

also go suck dicks

Well, if you've actually read all those books, I salute your determination in becoming well-read.

>>1717732
Hey, I've done lots of nice stuff for people here. But yeah, mostly I guess I'm an ass.

I feel like I'm on /fit/.

>>1717734

who the fuck are you?

>>1717732
>>1717732
here's a collection of critical theory essays i compiled for you to not understand
how's that?
http://www.mediafire.com/?cr33wymdyhevu

>>1717068
Where did you start?

>>1717220
Mid twenties, shitty to average taste in movies. I would guess 25 give or take a year.

>>1717738
I was responding to this:
> funny how I've never seen a tripfag do anything even remotely as helpful/productive/selfless as this
I'm nobody, of course.

>>1717068
Shit OP. I don't even care. I admire your books. I just need to get my fucking life together, you make me feel like I'm wasting time, but maybe I already knew that.

>>1717068
>i've read them all

And yet not one fucking spine was cracked that day! Bad fucking liar!

>>1717761
I'm sure he's very careful with his books like I am.

I'm jelly of how well you're read. Jelly but inspired. Being jelly is where I get most of my inspiration. I'm off this board until I feel I've plumbed the depths of human knowledge.

>>1717764
Sniff. Sniff.

Sure smells like bullshit up in here.

Where's D&E when you need him?

>>1717777
He's being OP

>1717777
He doesn't actually read books.

Thoguh for real I doubt Deep&Edgy is clever enough/has a large enough library to pull something like this off

>>1717777
Here I am, ready to herp derp all over the fucking thread.

Um, OP, you had better define "better," because one's perception of "good" and even "better" is different from the next one's. Oh, and define "read" because you can "read" in the sense that your eyeballs scan the text on all the pages inside those books, but do you mean "read" to mean "have taken in the words and understood all of them to their fullest capacity" or do you mean "oh, gosh, I did zonk out a few times and merely scan the text without processing it."

READ FUCKING SAUSSURE!

you guys he reads a lot i just dont think he has much interest in anything other than his philosophy books

i think hes kind of shy on the inside and its really cute like you just want to stroke his hair and smile up at him

>>1717786
I don't. All my knowledge of literature comes from Wikipedia.

Bret Easton Ellis is the most literary writer I ever read.

And when I start losing the argument, I just nitpick with idiotic semantics.

Now you know.

>>1717790
> !!uutkfynVYKA

>>1717793
I really just want to mutually masturbate with Deep&Edgy (I don't do oral or anal, sorry, boiz) and so feel compelled to defend him in the shittiest, most emotional (read: unintelligent) way. I'm crying. I love that man!

>>1717793
Too bad literature isn't "philosophy books."

>>1717799
i wouldn't want to objectify him like that

sides' most of the shittier tripfags suck his dick anyway so i dont want to do that on here (defending him in shitty arguments)

i think of him as Salieri whereas im like Mozart because im prob. the smartest on the board

>>1717801
i think it is

but i see your point

it must be hard for you

im sorry for shitting up the board im just a horrible person and i have no other means of expressing myself and i love you guys so much please let me stay

>>1717806
It's not.

Yahoo Chat has it right with "Books and Literature." There is a distinction to be made, there. It is the same distinction with movies and films.

This is called /lit/ - Literature. Maybe Moot can make /books/ so everyone can go there to talk about Kant and Ellis and God-knows-who-else.

>>1717814
>yahoo chat
lol

but uhm, i think /lit/ can handle it, just like we do the history threads

i wish there were more history threads though

i wanted to major in history once

there's definitely still time...

and i didn't know that films and movies were different

thats interesting

>>1717818
Wow. Just. Fucking wow.

1) This post is all about you.
2) You are wholly undiscerning.

I like watermelon and chicken. Guess who I am.

>>1717068
>>1717830
>>1717818
>>1717814
>>1717806
>>1717803
>>1717801
literature |ˈlit(ə)rə ch ər; -ˌ ch oŏr; -ˌt(y)oŏr|
noun
1 written works, esp. those considered of superior or lasting artistic merit : a great work of literature.

faggots and negro

yo OP, so what are your favorites, huh?

Sure OP hasn't read all these books. He just really enjoys being the wunderkind of /lit/.

>>1717830
sorry i just want attention

>>1717844
what does that prove?

seriously, fuck this, I'm going to read something right now and stop f5'ing.. fuck..

>>1717741

>>1717885
>>1717885
you wish faggot

>>1717814
>>1717814
yeah of only there was a book board
>>>/book/

bumping

shouldn't we archive this?

>>1717915
>transfering to book
i think you know that's not what he meant

>>1718299
>archive a bookshelf thread
mel

a

noma

>Post cool collection.

>Nutriding everywhere

Get a room guys. OP you seem cool, it's not your fault you got groupies.

Rich people make me so sad

I think I'm in love. Those are some sweet books, mister. You yourself, however, are expendable.

Just leave me the books in your will.

I've had more women than you OP, and that's what counts.

>>1718317
retard tripfag fails to see irony here

>>1718351

How fast can you read, OP?

>>1718349

only fucked one woman, so, as long as you're shooting > 1, then yeah, you have been with more women than i have. congrats.

>>1717870

that really depends on the area/genre...

are you asking about strictly lit?

>>1718415
just whatever pops into mind bro

I dig.

That collection lacks some srs Rawls/Bentham.

(Or I'm just way too lazy to click through every single picture.)

>>1718422

i've got a lot of rawls; one of my majors was political science. gotta have rawls for that.

though, for the most part i find him problematic. him, sandel, pogge, sen--i find all the communitarian or kantian scholars lacking, and stand behind people like bonnie honig or chantal mouffe who see conflict and competition as the real virtues of democratic politics, rather than the designed stasis of some "just" utopia. i'm all for utopia--i think rawls just missed the target...

So where are you hiding the Arabic, Mystic and esoteric East-Asian philosophy books op you sly dog you

I don't get why some of you are stating that he obviously couldn't have read the books because "there are no cracked/creased spines." I never manage to damage my books when I read them, even after trips to school, in backpacks, etc. The worst that happens is the outer edges of the cover may get a slight bend.

It's much more bewildering to me to think that a person could have read that much by age 21 on top of school, a job, and (I'm assuming) a social life. It's not shocking at all to have a large collection with few signs of wear...

I fully believe that there's a good chance that the OP has read a majority of his books if he says so, though. What's your favorite /lit/, OP?

>>1718433
political philosophy is like watching babies learn to walk. just so bad and slow.

>>1718434

i don't have that much eastern stuff. i have MAJOR statements, such as tibetan book of the dead, some buddhist scriptures, tao te ching and hua hu chang, the i ching, works by confucius, and the romance of the three kingdoms, and some chinese and japanese poetry--but beyond that, little. also have some stuff from mahmoud darwish, so i guess that counts as well.

i have kahlil gibran and pseudo-dionysus, though, which for me sorta constitutes the edge of the sorta of religious mysticism/literature from that region that i find interesting, or at least relevant to my interests (which, admittedly, are deeply intertwined with the parameters of the western education in which i developed)

>>1718451
most eastern stuff you can get a grasp of by reading a little summary. the rest is just details.

>>1718435
yeah a lot of people in this thread (HEY TRIPFAGS) seem to not get that we're collectively busting nuts over the claimed amount of reading, not the collection. honestly i don't get pure bookshelf threads (filled with fantasy bullshit), we live in a world where we can download almost any book we want, why would we care?

>>1718451

>Pseudo-Dionysius

Fuck the haters.

>>1718453
onionring what's your grasp of the kyoto school (which, by the way, I would suggest to OP if he wants to get more books in the way of eastern stuff)

Favourite Joyce novel?

>>1718460
very subtly told; good job tripfag

>>1718461

dubliners. i don't particularly enjoy portrait of the artist, and i respect ulysses/finnegans wake much more for their scholarly merit than out of the enjoyment i derive from reading them.

>>1718460
way too much work to accomplish something i can do on a pinhead.

>>1718468
thanks for pointing this out. i didnt notice myself but i've seen her act like an idiot alot recently.

>>1718476
favourite story in dubliners other than the dead?

>>1718490

araby, a little cloud, and clay

You look like the typical fucking neckbeard academic faggot

You're just an advanced form of the proto-hipster that hangs around all of academia

>>1718511

i wouldn't really say that. what's the basis of your judgment, and how did you reach that conclusion?

>>1718517
>Nietzsche
>Political Theory
>Marx

so deep

>>1718520

so it's because i'm interested in nietzsche and political theory?

Well, a vision for an utopia is flawed in many ways, no matter how seamless the theory is. It's the end goal in mind that is problematic. It's like Bellamy's Looking Backward, it proposes solutions in order to achieve full stability but as a series of LSE lectures by Layard pointed out, completely security equates to stagnancy. Also, nobody is ever going to be completely content and view themselves as social equals with every other person -- it's a zero-sum game -- status. But, still I'm jelly as jelly.

It would be inappropriate to ask for your personal contacts, I figure. The books are just so... badass.

>>1717228
why the presocratics, op? isn't what we have about them in other books not written by them (aristotle talking about them, etc.)?

>>1718524
>so it's because i'm interested in nietzsche and political theory?

. . . and you make an effort to ensure people know you are.

i don't understand why that is necessarily a bad thing.

>>1718535

>>1718535
it's only bad if you're pretentious. but if you actually know your shit, you can do it. that's how it works.

>>1718554
>if you actually know your shit

how does this work

>>1718524
Political theory is to politics as Science fiction is to science

Just some guy talking about what he's imagines to be cool

Nietzsche...oh lol

Marx, even bigger lol.

Only the academic equivalent of hipsters read that shit, the ones who try to be edgy but really aren't, at all.

>>1718554
>implying pretentious people don't think they know their shit

>>1718561
not reading 5 aphorisms and then talking to me about nietzsche at a party

>>1718528

i'm not quite so sure about this. i'm actually working on a project now that focuses on this problem: virtually every utopia ever devised is totally stagnant, correct, marked only by various surface or superficial movements that constitute the circular repetition of the day-in-day-out proceduralism. but what if we invert the model, or at least tweak it, such that competition and conflict are not only nourished within the structure, but encouraged as well? I'm thinking of a sort-of brave new world scenario (which i see more as a blueprint than a warning), in which the strong and intelligent do rise to the top and where everyone else, prone to the "infinite distractions" of civilized life, may carry out their duties with the surface movement we just described. functionally, it works, while the elite intellectuals, whose own existence is distinguished by fierce competition within a particular enclave, are able to rule, returning us to socratic problems of philosopher kings or various other intellectual-elite political frameworks.

this is obviously a VERY basic outline, but one in which i think could potentially be expanded (especially given current methods of digitization and population control--h.g. wells is still one of the only people i've read who understands the central place of technology and science in the development and maintenance of this kind-of framework) into a powerful biopolitics in which the distance between strong and weak that is so central to nietzsche's philosophy is preserved and the strong vie against each other in the open olympiads of the mind wherein what is at stake is the political future of mankind. the main point: you can have utopias that reach beyond stagnation.

>>1718580
And what concrete actions are you taking to make this a possibility exactly, besides reading books and talking with other academics?

>>1718580
>science fiction
Thanks for proving my point

>>1718580

But the thing with the mere definition of utopia is that it contradicts any sort of friction between individuals. Utopia = perfection = maximum utility = unprecedented happiness. By that equation, it is a logical fallacy to say that it is possible to introduce any form of competition within or amongst utopian societies since it directly compromises the utility of its people.

Other than habituation working against the formation of anything close to a utopia, people's tendencies to view themselves with others as points of references (rivalry) further contributes to its sci-fic value.

On that note, I have to get back to real life (that means stop procrastinating and go read Obeyesekere) but let me reiterate, your books are badass.

>>1718562

i don't really know what you mean by this. only hipsters read nietzsche and marx?

and i'm not sure even where to begin with your comparison...theory is considerably more central to the ouevre of western politics than you obviously think. otherwise, it's like giving a monkey the codes to a nuke and saying "go for it, wheneva you feel like it." without theory, there is no ethics; without ethics, there are no boundaries to action; without boundaries to action, mankind's egocentricism emerges in its full freudian splendor only to wreak havoc. russell talked about that in "a science to save us from science." but more fundamental than this: theory constitutes both a vantage point and a way in the original greek, corresponding, i think, to the nature of theory in contemporary practice: that it not only determines the margins of sight by which we choose to proceed (an act of power, i would argue), but also gives us the very tools and language to accomplish that procession is testament to theory's ongoing importance. that today you may read or participate in politics without theory, or you may work in the scientific fields without a substantial knowledge of philosophy and ethics, points only to the growing divergence between areas of knowledge that should overlap and, in an ideal situation, convalesce at the same utopian horizon.

what you get in your model is blatant irresponsibility: a population that may read, but doesn't have the self-control to read what is necessary, doesn't have the education and sight necessary to distinguish what is worth reading from what is not, and doesn't have the prescience to foresee the impact of their actions/decision beyond an imminent, narrow perspective on the immediate future.

>>1718580
How can you claim to read so much and then talk so much absolute liquid bullshit?

>>1718597

i am amassing superior wealth and will be entering into the political arena within the decade. i'm heading to law school first. that's what i'm doing to realize it; what are you?

>>1718580
sooo capitalism, except intellectual bs instead of hard work

>>1718633

if you would maybe elaborate on what you mean by "liquid bullshit" then maybe we could talk about it. i've tried to make it clear that i'm willing to discuss ideas. so far you seem just to play ad hominems--its juvenile, and not worth my time.

why does this threa have so many posts??

>>1718627
Yes.

Cool story, bro

Political theory has no right to even be called theory. It lacks serious study and an objective look at the data, it's all just written by people who have grand ideas and cherrypick some data or metaphors to prove their point.

Not to say politics don't matter. They do. But if political theory disappeared today we'd probably have far more reasonable, scientific discourse on economics and politics than ever imagined.

>>1718643
What am I what? Doing to live out my dreams? I am taking some concrete steps, yes. Though, admittedly I am not putting in as close to s much effort as you are. I commend you for it.

But good luck. There are a lot of other wealth (wealthier even) people who are working towards goals totally opposed to yours, and with twice the fervor (sorry for being presumptuous on this point, bu I am convinced of it nonetheless, and I am sure you will readily agree).

Do you want to run for public office someday?

yeah OP you'd be perfect for politics

>>1718643
oh God no

Oh wait, accumulating wealth while reading Marx and lurking 4chan?

Working at Starbucks does not count as amassing superior wealth

>>1718683
his parents left him a hefty sum when they tragically died

OP, are there any places on the internet or in real life where people like you talk like this and discuss things properly? not to rim you too much, but you are obviously destroying everybody here, i really hope you have some other outlet. i mean, i have school, but you're not even in grad school yet. honestly even uni is kind of shit because everyone is too busy/specialized/retarded.

lol'd at translated philosophical works

>>1718699
faced with a choice between spending time learning ideas and ancient greek, you choose greek?

>>1718689
>OP

>>1718710
I did, but you might have a point there..

>>1718627
>>"a population that may read, but doesn't have the self-control to read what is necessary, doesn't have the education and sight necessary to distinguish what is worth reading from what is not"
>>have hundreds of unread books
>>doesn't actually read what is necessary

>>1718662
>>1718662

this is just stupid. leibniz wanted his universal logic to act as something of a social mediator: that great social and political problems could be discussed within the confines of a reliable, reproducible and scientifically-sound logical framework also became the general hope of thinkers like frege and russell, as well. but it's actually weber, i think, who does a good job of showing how "formal legal rationalism," wherein you plug a question/problem into a machine and out pops your answer, is actually undesirable. as long as humans persist, theory is necessary--it shapes discourse itself, not only content-wise but the trajectory of structural hermeneutics as well. logic is not the endgame of the human project--at best, i think that it shows that an overdetermination of methodology can lead to myopicism and dogmaticism.

you seem to want a world that is without the human, were questions are always reducible to a compact, scientific and logical answer and where those infinitely minute and incomprehensible variables that constitute what we experience as "life as is" are marginalized or forgotten all together. this is not how the world is, nor how it ought to be.

>>1718739

don't presume to know what i have and have not read--you simply don't. even in an ideal situation, your strategy can only blindly guess at what i know/do not know--you lack any concrete knowledge of my situation or my capabilities.

learn how to argue.

>>1718662
HOW DO YOU GET THE DATA? QUESTIONS MUST BE DEVISED ON SURVEYS. WHICH QUESTIONS TO ASK? YOU ARE A MOUTHBREATHER

>>1718750
Cool story again, bro

I'd agree with all of it when it comes to philosophy, or other things that when they're wrong don't get other people killed.

However, politics are too important to be left to fucking 'theory.' Political theory has had a very large impact of human life, and most of it has been very negative. You, most likely, will be adding to its negative impact.

>>1718651
Not that guy but, any philosophofag worth his salt should know what an ad hominem is.

http://plover.net/~bonds/adhominem.html

OP, a few questions I hope you can answer:

Have you read anything by Haruki Murakami?
What's your favorite Vonnegut novel?
Have you read Infinite Jest?
What did you think of V. by Pynchon?

>>1718627
LOL, fuck. Thank god you're not going into academic philosophy. I'm rather grateful that you're going to spare us your sci-fi philosophy shit.

>>1718784

if it weren't for the "negative impact of political theory," then you'd still be a peasant shinning the shoes of some nobleman, who is most likely tied in politically to the church given his stature and the domination of unopposed church doctrine, and who still holds a literal "right" over your body.

but you're right--when have ideas ever caused people to start a revolution, to create/amend a constitution, or to participate in civil disputes? clearly, all these things simply happen without theory, and are part of the scientific trajectory that you see as so superior to theory.

don't you see the ironic tragedy in it all--that only the rich are the ones who own, read or talk about marx seriously, or any other vision for an alternative political existence?

>>1718798

i don't understand: i was making an argument for the centrality of theory that was removed from my own individual characteristics; he didn't attack my ideas, but my vague "liquid bullshit", trying to undermine the force of my ideas without actually responding to them directly. isn't this ad hominem?

For when you enter public life, can you tell us something we might recognize you by? I would want to support you.

>>1718820
No. You better get back to read the 98% of those books that you haven't read.

>>1718820
I think Angry Anon is right, that wasn't an ad hominem argument. It was more "infantile namecalling." I think you're doing fine...except that it seems like you're getting baited more and more. You might consider taking a bow for this successful thread and coming back later. The vultures are circling.

>>1718801

actually haven't read any marukami...plenty of my friends have, and my girlfriend is rather fond of his style. the wind-up bird chronicle is on my reading list, though still pretty far down...

as far as vonnegut goes, i'm really torn. from what i've seen here previously, a lot of people seem to snub vonnegut as a great writer--i think he's pretty damn good. no proust, but few are. in any case, i liked galapagos, sluaghter-house five, cat's cradle and sirens of titan. never read breakfast of champions or his recently released stuff, and timequak just didn't hit me like the others.

yes, i've read infinite jest, and several other works by DFW. about to cover pale king.

v. is a great book, in my opinion. pynchon gets repititive in style after a while, but i had started with v. and crying of lot 49, so i was sorta hooked by it initially. returning to it, i still really enjoy it, and i think that it really does possess some superior scholarly merit.

>>1718821

uhh my name is rapture...

i guess that's pretty hard to miss...

>>1718762
Are you embarrassed about the fact that you haven't read the vast majority of those books? It isn't just the fact that almost none of them look like they have been opened before. It is impossible for someone who is 22 to have read even 10% of those books. Even if you have "read them all" you must have such a superficial understanding of them that you would be wasting your time. It is better to read a few books thoroughly than 100 superficially.

Learn to argue.

>>1718826

Yet another ad hominem argument. Ignore this one, folks.

>>1718847
what if he spent 3-4 hours a night reading? that's 2 books done in one week, assuming he's going at the modest pace of 1 page / 2 minutes.
let's say he did that for a month: 8 books a year: 72 books
see where i'm going with this?

i am disappointed that op is "well-learned" but does not seem to have learned how to suffer fools. he is 21, i guess. op should respond to the actual questions remaining in this thread instead of arguing with morons

>>1718807
So true. All of the philosophy professors I know would rofl at this thread.

>>1718858
Protip: Op is not well-learned. He is the prime-example of a pseudointellectual. Someone who has to buy 100's of esoteric continental philosophy books and then post them online to prove they are intelligent to a bunch of gullible 15 year old 4channers.

>>1718862

how so?

>>1718867
messy as fk.

a lot of butthurt ITT, and none of it from the OP

>>1718864

see that's what i'm sort-of trying to avoid. if you have a specific topic in mind, or want to field a center argument, then go for it--i'm happy to talk about anything that i've read/covered. you make that difficult with that sort-of blanket statement, which, again, is marked by a total non-knowledge oh who i am.

so far your argument is: review my pictures, comment on how i haven't read any of it, call me a psudointellectual. if your intellectualism is a product of that little thought/review, then yeah, according to such standards am i certainly a pseudointellectual, and will happily carry that as a title.

but i like your books.

>>1718864
Protip: starting a post with bullshit like that is annoying. OP may be a liar, but if so he is a good liar, so good a liar that through the internet i can't tell the difference between him and a real person who shares his claimed characteristics. Nothing he writes is being torn down in any sort of reasonable way, unless two lines of smug bullshit is reasonable. If you think he's a liar, engage him properly or don't bother; this halfway bullshit is fucking depressing.

>>1718886

you know a person IRL that shared my claimed characteristics, or am i just reading that wrong?

I will post this one more time:

HOW THE FUCK DO YOU PEOPLE TREAT YOUR BOOKS IF THE OP'S LOOK "UNOPENED"?

OKAY. THEY LOOK FAIRLY NEW AND DON'T HAVE MANY IMPERFECTIONS IN THE SPINE OR ANYTHING. I'LL GIVE YOU THAT. BUT GUESS WHAT? NEITHER DO ANY OF THE PAPERBACKS THAT I READ.

Christ, do trade paperbacks instantly turn into creased monstrosities when the people of this board come within 5 feet of them or something?

>>1718892
a theoretical real person. i don't know any 21 year olds with dead brothers.

When did you start reading philosophy OP? How much do you read per day?

>>1718892

OP i think i've met you irl. your name is actually rapture, your borther is arclight, and if i said your last name people would recognize it wouldn't they?

if troll, greatest troll ever

>>1718913

This. Are you an extremely fast reader? How do you have time for all this?

>>1718913

my brother's name is arcturus--arclight is his nickname. but yeah rest is accurate--who are you? where have we "met"?

>>1718932
Rapture, I respect your collection, as do the others in this thread.

What were your opinions of Deleuze's Anti-Oedipus, are you a Freudian and did you enjoy reading Robert Greene? What was your favorite book by him?

>>1718942
>psychoanalysis

>>1718942

deleuze and freud gotta wait--i need to go, soon.

as far as robert greene goes, i have liked his work so far. it is sorta rudimentary, and you can derive most of his "laws" or "strategies" pretty easily from the primary source material, but he compiles it nicely and writes in an accessible style. his points, however, only really come to bear in light of other theory--mainly, i think, Nietzsche. it's sorta refreshing to see a book come out on "how to manipulate others" or "how to dominate strategically in social affairs" in a culture that seems to encourage that behavior structurally (the ideology of capitalism being the primary force) but then denounce it whenever it comes to bear.

for instance, despite his obvious transgressions, i saw madoff as someone who had read robert greene and had implemented his strategies. of course, i have no idea of bernie ever picked aything from greene, but do you see what i mean? the divide between actual implementation and rhetorical strategy is such a huge one that, unless you actually strive get ahead and don't mind leveling a few rules/relationships in the process, then greene just becomes sorta "another" book. it's interesting, especially in light of machiavelli's discussions of fortuna and virtu, but ultimately falls flat, i think, only because the people reading it never actual move to seduce or control people. i think greene does some good stuff--it's just the readership that i am less quick to compliment.

OP are you gay?? would love to tend to rich mans cock

>>1718968
he's prob. ugly tho

>>1718963
this style of doing social theory is just ideological horseplay.

>>1718970
>>1718970

Doesnt matter as long as I get some good money for it

>>1718972
not to say it's never productive, but it won't accomplish much change. it is blind culture.

>>1718978
you're a big ole slut you are

/lit/ you guys are pathetic. some aspie 16 year old craving attention takes pictures of his parents' book collection and nice car and you guys are falling all over yourselves to suck his cock. you guys forgetting that this is the internet and anyone can make any kind of shit up? this guy is this board's version of a standard /b/ camwhore posting pictures and going "look at me! rate me guys?" and all of you are lapping it up. seriously /lit/, I am disappoint.

>>1719008
please read the thread before wasting everybody's time

Its easier to see the books upon the shelf than to see yourself.
- George Harrison

>>1718963
Yeah, I see exactly what you mean, although the readership should not be a critique of the actual book itself, but I do definitely see your point.

I wish we could get your MSN or email, bro. Would love to keep in contact with you. You're quite the interesting intellectual.

>>1717709
I think it shows what /lit/ is. They seem to be attaching to much value to material possessions.

>>1718929
>>1718937
What the fuck kind of names are those

>>1719055
>>1719008

to be fair to the OP, he does seem like a pretty reasonable guy

at least he is trying to talk about issues. doesn't seem fair to belittle him and then have nothing to contribute besides "zomg /lit is falling apart"

OP can you do advanced math. If not then I am better than u

>>1719008
>>1718937

ok so we met in a precept freshman year at princeton. you've smoked me out before (i'm a chick, btw)

if OP is actually the kid i know, then OP is legit. probably the smartest person i've ever met, and easily the wealthiest, too. but i can't tell for sure if OP is this kid, or if he just knows him/knows of him. epic troll if troll

i dont want to say his name and then be wrong, but it would make a lot of this a lot more understandable

>>1719108
thread now about tits and u posting them

>>1719116
or it would be if it weREN'T OVER 300 POSTS GODDAMN

>if OP is actually the kid i know, then OP is legit. probably the smartest person i've ever met
wow this just makes me appreciate how smart d&e really is even more.

This thread may be a defining moment in /lit/ history but it's nothing compared to that time an actual Hollywood director asked us what book he should make into a film

>>1719030

yeah dude i didn't articulate it very well but that's sorta my main problem with greene. you finish it, and are like "now what?" it masquerades as a quasi-practical social rulebook, despite being rather impractical in the ebb and flow of daily interaction. part of what interests me, and what demonstrates the point in a different manner, is where you find greene in your local bookstore. for me, he's put in the business section--but i could see him just as easily be put into a "self-help" section or an aisle for philosophy. with other works coming out such as "barbarous philosophers" and "grand strategies: literature, statecraft and world order", which also take on the related subjects of strategy and political economy, then greene's position is hard to locate. is he a social scientist, a reader of history, a social psychologist? he rests at an odd juncture, which is partly why i like him and partly why i think that his work is incomplete. i feel like you could read him much more pragmatically in a different era, where the tightly-nit social fabric of economy and social interaction wasn't quite stitched in yet and where you could potentially carry out these experiments of manipulation, seduction and strategy without much repurcussion, or without tarnishing your reputation in an economy where reputation and image have almost superseded actual talent or work ethic.

yo rapture or OP whatever, you seem like a cool guy. if you're the one talking bout starcrafting, let's hit up some games sometime; name's Alt23 #997

this is part of the reason i have bought so many books, too. while i have read close to 97-98% of what i own, i could have easily just gone to the library to do it. the difference is one of strategic image: i'm tired of those meager, banal conversations at the beginning of any new relationship where what is at stake amidst the simple-minded chit-chat is really who is going to come out of the social interaction the designated alpha. in a culture such as nyc, filled with hipsters and "pseudoinllectuals," it is a lot easier to simply present a library as a representation of your intelligence and win the language game through the shock-and-awe of imagery before it even begins. so, kids walk into my apartment, either respect my library or find me "pretentious," and the game goes on from there. i've already made my statement, which is essentially "this is what i've read"--it works almost universally, and saves me the bore of having to prove through conversation or heedless arguments that yeah, they should defer to my opinion. as egotistical as that sounds, i have tried to fashion an identity around a strategic manipulation of imagery. for the most part, i can back up the image as needed, but it's position as a initial threshold that my would-be interlocuters must pass through automatically gives me the upper hand, which i enjoy. that's basically where greene starts and ends for me. in a perverted way, the books kinda act as a troll on my behalf.

i'm happy to swap info, by the way.

>>1719147

dude im happy to play but i'm still sorta a noob...i can't compete against the asians.

i just use my counsin's account login credentials: his username is "ulexi"

>>1719108

your name is bella. yo you were pretty cool--you still at princeton, right?

>>1719165
Ahhhh it's all good bro, I'm a shitty diamond player. We can slum it out in some awful league and I might learn something at the same time.

>>1719165

yup! lol i didn't think you'd remember me

still at princeton, graduating this may with an english degree. last i heard you had gone to harvard--you left to go to NYU?


>>1719116
tits aren't allowed on /lit :-)

it's a shame, too, because for a thread this epic it might have been worth it

>>1719196

nobody said you couldn/t post tits

so post tits

>>1719231

if OP asked me to, i actually might. otherwise, tough luck :-P

>>1719244

i mean i don't really care, but you have my clearance to go for it. as i recall, you have an unusually nice ass

>>1718399
>fucked one woman
Most impressive thing I've read so far.

>>1719336

how so? i don't know if you're making fun of me or not...

>>1719347
more likely that he's making fun of this board

>>1719286

thanks! i like my ass, too

i just had to post it in a thread that's over 300 on /lit

>>1719385
Elizabeth?

>>1719410

no i know a girl named elizabeth though

who is this

>>1719385

wait who is this

>>1719410
i'm not elizabeth, but i think i know who you're talking about, too. does she have brown hair and use to live in forbes?

who are you?

>>1719440

no i used to know a blonde-haired chick named elizabeth

i'm not sure if that's the other poster's same elizabeth or not

>>1719410

plus how could you possibly guess someone's name from a random ass? unless we have the same underwear or something

ok i dunno who is who i don't really care. any good actual /lit topics?

>>1719481
having read so much, do you often forget what you have and haven't read? how much do you retain of what you read

>>1719410
I might know you. First name?

>>1719521
You don't know me, but my name is Jim.

>>1719481
I still want to know how many of the books you've read were ultimately worth reading.

>>1719557
Oh ok well I'm bella. You go to princeton? And whyd you think I was your friend? Was it the underwear?

>>1719634
Oh, no, I don't go to Princeton. You're not anyone I know and you probably don't konw anyone I know. I was just trying to creep you out

>>1719655
Haha it was a totally random guess? Its so funny cause I realized that I think I have the same bedspread as a girl named elizabeth here. Do you actually know someone here named elizabeth or was it a shot in the dark?

>>1719688
It wasn't random. I used the skype name I found peeking in the pic's exif data. Simple as that

>>1719698
Oh fuck. Cat's out of the bag.
> wink wink

>>1719746
what was the secret?

>>1719801
Far be it from me...

>>1719801
I dunno, maybe the pic isn't really her

>>1719746
>>1719698

OHH ok lol no it's me. i'm using my roommates computer cause she was away and mine's in the shop. that's what freaked me out so much- i thought you actually knew her, or me.

i was going to post so many hot pictures too you idiot you totally killed it. have frun not seeing my ass

>>1719926
That's OK, I'm really more upset about how this tuna sandwich doesn't have any lettuce or tomato on it

>>1720001
To elaborate: I ordered a tuna sandwich from a convenience store and when I brought it home I expected there to be tomato and lettuce on it but there was no tomato or lettuce. I specifically ordered it with tomato and lettuce and it even says so on the receipt. Oh well, I don't think the tomato or lettuce increases the price at all. The only problem: I'm forced to use my own tomato and lettuce. Maybe it's for the best: they were about to go bad soon, and the convenience rarely gives my very much tomato and lettuce on my sandwich in the first place.

>>1719481
why the presocratics?

Fuck, I wish I could bump this.

You guys are so easily impressible. I've read Wikipedia. The whole damn thing. No pictures to show for it, but that's more knowledge than any of those books OP didn't finish reading. OP can't even capitalise properly.

OK maybe I've only read like half of Wikipedia, but still.

>>1720824
Wikipedia actually doesn't have that much info on it

>>1720858
About one precise topic? No, it doesn't have that much info. About ALL topics? How about you go read it all and we can talk about it again?

bumping

hey rapture, are you still here?

>>1720962
he's not

>>1720968

depressing. i hope he comes back!

>>1720969
me too