/lit/ - Literature

>>19937686
just be yourself

I do not quite understand what alternative is that he suggests.

>>19937686
Do people really think this is deep? It’s basic bitch Reddit philosophy that you see all the time. Hell, he even wrote in such a pretentious way to hide the fact that he said nothing of substance. It ultimately reads like that one highschool fedora kid who quotes Nietzsche and tries to be edgy to appear like an intellectual.

life is meaningless

Eh. I've seen worse. He's saying that if you look back and see how we've operated out whole life.. we've never been able to interrupt the flow to create a cause that isn't there.

It's bad but not terrible.

>>19937759
Ironically it is your post that is pretentious and without substance.

The quote is taken from his fiction, spoken by a character from a culture in a setting where the particular way that is written does not feel incongruent with anything else being spoken of. It is a very simple statement, no one is pretending that it isn't, however the themes of freewill and determinism are very important to the series, and this was a perfectly acceptable way to begin introducing these themes in the discourse of several characters. It isn't a revelation, it isn't a brand new theory, it is simply the laying down of the motivations behind a particular religious faction in the setting that will continue to be thematically and narratively important throughout the series.

The fact something so simple as this filtered you is pathetic. Maybe try Brandon Sanderson.

>>19937686
it's not meaningless, it's just using "darkness" as a medieval stand-in for some phil of mind concept

>>19937759
how about i make u my basic bitch?

>>19937686
uhh, I think that's kind of cool.

>>19937759
pasta

God, or nature

>>19937686
The quote sounds retarded and pretentious not to mention extremely basic. Don't know who the fuck is this Bakker guy is, but he sounds like a pompous blowhard trying to appear deep and philosophical than he is. Nothing of substance was said, superficially deep, it’s like he’s trying to be some profound thinker and it falls laughably short.

>>19937686
And what causes the movement of the cause of my movement? and so on?

>>19937778
go away bakker

>>19937686
Why is it meaningless? It's just saying that humans have no control whatsoever of the thing that makes them have control (thoughts). The first thought is not thought, it comes from something outside humanity. And if it's the case that it comes from humanity, there's no responsibility or consciousness involved.

>>19937686
The Heavens, the sun, the whole of nature is a corpse. Nature is given over to the spiritual, and indeed to spirutal subjectively; thus the course of nature is everywhere broken in upon by mircales - R Scott Bakker, lectures of the history of philosophy III

>>19938025
* spiritual subjectivity

Everything in life is a social contract. From the moment we wake up to the moment we go to bed. We all do something looking fo something in exchange. That's just the egoistical nature of the human being

>>19938025
>>19937686
Every act of free will is a miracle.

There ya go lads. I'm done for the day. Back to shit posting and meditation.

>>19938056
up yours

>>19938056
Forgot pic
>>19938072
One good turn deserves another

>>19937970
See >>19937804

>>19938286
Ah, so he is a pompous blowhard trying to appear deep and philosophical than he really is.

>>19938290
I don't think you understand how stories work
I don't know anything about him so I can't say

>>19937714
Based. An ethical sympathy in an artist is an unpardonable mannerism of style.

>>19938081
ya? go FUCK yourself, buddy.

>quoting characters from a novel as if they speak for the author
From the same books:
>The loss: a mere place. What was this compared to the revelation that accompanied it?
>That which comes after could determine that which comes before … The impossible made manifest. The world was an arrow with one and only one direction, or so they had believed. Only the Logos, only reason and reflection could bend the world’s inexorable course. Thus the Dûnyain and their hallowed mission: to perfect the Logos, to grasp the origins of thought, bend the arrow into a perfect circle, and so attain the Absolute …Become a self-moving soul. Free.
>But the Shriekers and their Singers cared nothing for their doctrine—only for their extinction.
>“What do we do now?” the boy had asked that first day in the sun.
>“Tarry …” he said.
>That which comes after, he now knew, determined that which comes before. Purpose was no illusion. Meaning was real.

>>19937804
>if some stuff I made up is true
>then other stuff I made up must also be true

Maybe he should stick to writing kid's books and stop pretending he’s a philosophy.

>>19937759
No, people don't think it's "deep" nor is it meant to. This quote describes the foundational axiom of the Dunyain, a faction within Bakker's stories. Axioms by definition have to be simple and self-evident. You're shitting yourself over the equivalent of a mathematician saying that parallel lines do not cross.

>>19937686
The world is all that is the case .

>>19937686

>>19938837
I was very annoyed the first time I opened the Tractatus, how can he start by explaining so badly the first axioms of his purpose?

>>19938858
This has a pretty concrete meaning, you can act upon your desires but you don't get to choose what you desire in the first place

>>19937686
This entire book.

>>19938687
Either you're some doomer incel or a straight up retard, because that quote is about as straightforward as it gets.

We're born, we die, and all else comes between, starting in the shame of instinct and ignorance, ending in the shame of neverending slight. How dare we come? How dare we go?

>>19937686

>>19938687
actually a good quote

gay thread

If people want to live they live if they don’t they don’t

people don't think it be like it is, but it do.

Think I'm too autistic to understand any of these quotes. Am I ngmi?

>>19939340
I always interpreted it as: the ultimate philosophical question is whether life is worth living.

>>19937686
Easily, by understanding and acknowledging the light.

>>19937686

>>19938858
Schopie's ethics are the simplest shit to understand. You are determined to act as such by your being, but you can also will yourself into being determined otherwise in the future.

I think the meaning beyond the pseud poetry is "everything that happens right now was set into play at some point in the past". It's not exactly profound but it's something a lot of people neglect to fully consider.

>>19938858
Actually a very meaningful statement and I've met lots of people who don't even begin to understand it and they suffer for it. You can do whatever you want, but it doesn't mean you'll enjoy it. The things you enjoy are *basically* hard coded within you, and trying to change them rather than embrace them is a road to misery.

>>19940571
>as many
as many as what? retard

>>19938875
Well, in his defense he expounds on what he means by "the case" immediately after. What is the case is a "Sachverhalte", or state of affairs. A state of affairs decomposes into a configuration of Tatsachen, facts. These facts are atomic and correspond to a term in a proposition. The proposition then renders a Bild, or picture of the state of affairs. To the extent that the proposition's logical relations correspond to an accurate picture which corresponds to some state of affairs, it is true. Etc.

Be here now

Like no fucking shit, where else am I going to be

"God is an infinite substance, consisting of infinite attributes, each of which expresses an infinite essence."
-Baruch Spinoza

Every cause was made from a cause. THERE ARE NO CAUSES. It's an effect too.

>>19941684
>God is
The presupposition that god is anything is baseless.

>>19941550
I didn't write that shit. Karl Marx did

>>19941798
Well, according to Spizzy God is everything. There's nothing God can't be. As his infinite power pervades the created world and is coextensive with it.

>>19937804
>>19938819
>You don't get it, you have to read this manchildren's grimdark fantasy books to get his *dark* and *profound* quotes!!!
What about you go back to plebbit and stop polluting thos board, bakkerturds?

>>19938426
Maybe if you're a jew. All great white writers had very strong morals.

>>19940049
Make me see the light on this one. I like it, but I don't know if I quite grasp it.

>>19937987
This, it's not meaningless. However it's worthless and was discussed ad nauseam in the Enlightenment and before that.

Turds r 4 nerds

>>19941864
Bigger problems are easier to spot and fix?

>>19941864
>When the ambassadors came to him, they were ashamed of the ignorance in which the Romans had so long remained, but delivered the message of the Senate. When Alaric heard it, and that the people having been exercised to arms were ready for war, he remarked, "The thickest grass is more easy to cut than the thinnest." Having said this, he laughed immoderately at the ambassadors. But when they spoke of peace, he used such expressions as were in the extreme of arrogance and presumption. He declared, that he would not relinquish the siege on any condition but that of receiving all the gold and silver in the city, all the household goods, and the barbarian slaves.

>One of the ambassadors observing, "If you take all these, what will you leave for the citizens ?" He replied, "Their souls."

>>19941513
>but you can also will yourself into being determined otherwise in the future.
how could willing yourself to be otherwise fall outside the purview of one's in-built being?

"Existence exists."
-Ayn Rand

>>19941813
Yeah and I think >>19941684 was pointing out how that's such bullshit. You might as well remove god from that equation and nothing changes. I remember reading Spinoza thinks there is such a god because he "feels it down inside" lol

>>19942513
That's pretty funny.

>>19941858
name one

>>19942852
>Spinoza thinks there is such a god because he "feels it down inside" lol
Don't discount tulpas just because of your modern western mental health sensibilities, cultural anthropology and modern neuroscience have other things to say about hearing and feeling God.

Daily reminder that Kant was fully retroactively refuted by Bakker.

For example, while Quine fatally weakened the synthetic/analytic distinction, it was Bakker who provided the proof that calcified dogma is not observably different from analytic fact using a combination of the philosophy of information and semiotics of abstraction, joining the logical systems of Floridi to the physics of messaging via Landauer's Principal and computational entropy. Incomputability, Krylov Complexity, Yao Entropy, have disasterous consequences for proving analytics that are not tautologies, and nowhere is this more apparent then in the Dunyain-Logos Paradigm, as viewed from the Absolute Judging Eye Vector, Whale Rape Gang Bang Hypothesis laid out in The Great Ordeal. Bakker brings philosophy from Kant to Quine full circle, unsublating both, so both can be resublated as an organic whole into the dynamics of whale-mother-cave-rape-as-logos, which provides proof of the incompleteness of Logos due to the incomputability problem. Turing would have been proud!

Note that Kant is also more seriously retroactively refuted vis-á-vis the transcendental aesthetic via the proof of Meat Fueled Murder Rape Orgy (where the inefficiency of the alien space nuke, and resultant high level of radiation released, reminiscent of primitive, WWII era nuclear weapons, results in the Scalded as a boipussy dynamical system, which, shows that even a simple system represented by a differential equation can, and will necissarily produce chaos if it reaches a phase of three in any cycle.) The result is that the faculties cannot be an anchor of anything, as strong variance driven by "initial" conditions invariably leads to chaos. Bakker symbolizes this using the stochastic forces of nuclear radiation, as from those quantum activity we still see the larger classical objects of emergence in the rape orgy.

This shows the teleology of rape, the Inchori Theory and defeats appeals to classical ethics as such.

Again, even more than retroactive refutation, which others have done, Bakker RETROACTIVELY SUBLATES Kant.

>>19937686
I wouldn't call it meaningless, but he's just pointing out the obvious

>>19942859
Tolkien.
*Saint John.
Chesterton.
Lewis.
Rowling.
Burroughs.

*jews are White-adjacent

>>19944332
>Daily reminder that Kant was fully retroactively refuted by Bakker.
retard

>>19944332
Stop peddling your children’s fantasy author.

>>19937804
Oh fuck off Bakker it's getting pathetic now

>>19938819
It's peak plebbit and you know it

I think therefore I am

>>19944332
>For example, while Quine fatally weakened the synthetic/analytic distinction, it was Bakker who provided the proof that

It's so fucking obvious its use Bakker.
Imagine being an author who argues with autists on 4chan and spams word salad to try impress said people on 4chan lmao

>>19944657
>I am capable of being fully cognizant, therefore I exist
Pretty self-explanatory unless you have the IQ of a basketball-american

>>19944678
*it's you

>>19937686
But even without a Cartesian bedrock of certainty to undergird trust in our senses, it seems reasonable (at least for working scientists, if not always for more fastidious philosophers) to take the reliability of what we see as an assumption. Absent some strong reason to believe that there actually is an evil demon trying to trick us, it seems natural to put a high credence in the basic accuracy of our manifest picture of the world, and work from there. The problem arises when we start with our experience of the world, use it to construct our best theory of how the world actually operates, and then realize that this theory itself predicts that our sense data are completely unreliable.

>>19937686
>>19944628

>>19941513
>schopies ethics are so simple
>misunderstands them
He's a determinist anon. The Will, metaphysical, is one with our will, voilitional; we can choose NOT to will, that is not to have our will 'rubber stamp' the acts which our character have necessarily predetermined, but that is it. Given a good enough calculator all human acts could be known ahead of time.

No it doesn't make sense, no argument on free-will does.

>>19937686
One time a pseud friend of mine asked me if I prefer doxa or aletheia.

>>19944678
I am less than He who sent me. I could not hope to measure up to Bakker.

As a Bakkerite, being mistaken for him would be the highest of flattery. We exist only to yield to Him the limit of our being, to yield up the honey of our anus to the curved phallus of His intellect, that He might fill us black seed of His knowing. That we might gawk for sheer astounded wonder at the Absolute.

Bakker is a black hole, drawing in all information, sublating all as he progresses, comet like in intensity towards the Absolute. In the end, even Hegel is sublates, for the sheer enormity of being as being knowing itself as being. When Boehme beheld the Anger Well, he beheld Bakker.

>>19937686
>insert random sentence from Hegel here
done