/lit/ - Literature

>>21395726
https://vimeo.com/75647511

determinism and it's implication of evolution and absolution has caught my interest
'interstellar'

there's very few explorative texts in the modern age that's actually interesting.

kys dumb frog

>>21395726
>High IQ
how high?

>>21395726
>High IQ polymath
Do you let other men fuck your wife?

>>21395754
Yes, but only men from 4channel.

>>21395726
I can tell, even from what little you've written, you're lying.

The answer you seek, but probably don't want, is The Bible. It is without peer on this whole Earth.

>>21395751
Outside the measurable range. Probably near Chris Langan. On standard IQ tests I always score 100%.

>>21395766
The bible? You mean a collection of bronze age stories stolen from based Mesopotamian and Egyptian mythology and then trannified into cucked monotheism? Kinda mediocre in my opinion.

>>21395780
I imagine. Your real IQ is, after all, completely normal.

>>21395780
Based. Just be prepared for all the whining christcucks inbound

>>21395787
Hey look, another genius high IQ polymath, OP! You can make friends! Surprisingly plentiful, these genius polymaths...

>>21395786
>>21395839
You are butthurt, but it doesn't change the fact that we're right and you're wrong. The bible is an interesting read from a historical perspective because of its cultural impact on western literature, but overall it's not a deep or insightful book. Reading it doesn't change the reader's world view, and if christcuckery hadn't been the dominant religion for so many centuries, the bible would be just another mediocre work of fiction.

>>21395893
That's just like, your opinion man

>>21395726
The Bible

>>21395893
Lol, am I supposed to believe this is the work of genius - this slop that's rife with unoriginated concepts? Do yourself a favor, read and study the Bible. You can keep lying to yourself about its value, but you'll just trap yourself in the intellectual slum you're living in now. Crack a window. Take a breath. Read Scripture. There isn't a single written work which can compare on the face of the Earth. I'm not going to waste any further time trying to convince you. It's your life to throw away as you wish, but do yourself the favor.

For the love of God don't read the bible.

Just read the fucking Bible you dumb cunt

>>21395919
Introduction to Quantum Field Theory. There, I did it. I named a book more valuable and more insightful than the bible. QED.

Meccan revelations, hadith science, ottoman poetry which has 3128 poets and over 2.4 million couplets. Divan-ı Kebir by Rumi which has over 4952 pages. Spanish tax reports, really anything that is in a foreign language.

>>21395726
it seems what you lack is a soul and you can't make up for that by reading and knowing stuff
sorry, anon, better luck next time

>>21395726

>>21395726
Reminder that high IQ polymaths don’t make posturing threads on /lit/ seeking validation for their intelligence. You should be inspiring discussion, not asking to get spoonfed by a group predominately composed of illiterate retards

>>21395767
I don't believe you. Record yourself taking an online test.

>>21395726
>I've read almost all masterpieces of world literature. I also read almost all philosophical works, which to my big disappointment turned out to be utterly trivial.
Write your own shit then. Let your thoughts simmer as you write the insights down. If that's not satisfactory then you have no choice but to literally experience life and living. Go out and do a lot of things, with people, with wilderness, with drugs, with yourself. What are you even looking for? Ask yourself.

>>21395726
If you were high IQ and actually had a "background", you would be engaged in your own work and not asking 4chan what to consoom next. Alas, you're just an unoriginal larper

>>21396195
>noooooo, if you exchange ideas and inspiration with a community of contemporary intellectuals then you're not a true intellectual yourself
Onions

>>21396231
Asking to be passively spoonfed =/= an “exchange of ideas”. It’s not an exchange if you give nothing in return.

>>21395919
With all respect, a single compilation of Christian poetry from whatever European nation state, would overal be more insightful then the Bible.

>>21395726
Trivial how?

>>21395726
If you where an high IQ polymath, you could type out a short, though not perfect essay on the merits of different systems of philosopy, the fact that you did not proves you are not, I also find your rebuttles to why the Bible sucks mediocre and uninspiring, basically I could do better.

For example, though the psalms can be beautiful poetry at times, clearly there are far better and more insightful poets that give us a clearer idea about God and the human inner world.

> The bible? You mean a collection of bronze age stories stolen from based Mesopotamian and Egyptian mythology and then trannified into cucked monotheism? Kinda mediocre in my opinion

>>21396231
It's obvious OP is midwit range IQ from his topics of discussion and the tone of what he is saying. Just another larper pretending to be gigabrain but everyone can see he is not.
Attacking the Bible when you clearly have not read it, by saying it copies egyptians and mesopotamian mythology..? If your IQ was immeasurable you'd be able to explicitly write even just a handful of sentences sourced from ancient holy texts to back up your claim. Instead you (and all the other Christ-hating larpers on this board) are only here to pathetically attack the ONLY true religion on the planet.
The Bible is a real history of the world and there is not a single incorrect statement or false witness account inside it.
Funny how none of these posters ever have any insight on their own beliefs, besides muh science or muh seething jude/satanist

Can you offer any proof whatsoever that you're as smart as you say you are? Surely you have some original work or original idea you're proud of that you'd be willing to share?

>>21396267
>the only true religion just so happens to be the one that dominates my culture
Whatever retard

Check out this nibba Stuart Kauffman

>>21396295
>t. no rebuttal
I'll pray that you get a lot wiser

>>21396333
There was nothing in your post worthy of a rebuttal

>>21396337
You’re 40 years old and wearing a yarmulke right now LOL
Excuse me bro, you’re tiny beanie slipped and your bald spot is showing

>>21396267
Why would I waste my time going into details of how myths like Inanna and the Huluppu tree, Atrahasis or Ludlul Bel Nemeqi can be found in slightly modified form in the torah? If you ever opened babby's first book on Mesopotamian literature you'd already know this. The antisemitic remark at the end of your post makes it even more obvious how much of a ridiculous LARPer you, given that your whole post revolves around defending the originality of jewish mythology. Because that's what the bible is. Apart from a few Jesus stories the bible is just the Tanakh plus the Revelation which is merely a reception of / a reference to (a later misinterpretation) of contents from the Torah.

>>21395726
>which to my big disappointment turned out to be utterly trivial
Which was the least trivial of them?

>>21396252
>type out a short, though not perfect essay on the merits of different systems of philosopy
There are none. Philosophy is entirely trivial and of no merit. I have yet to see any philosophical construct or argument which my former 6 y.o. self couldn't instantly debunk. A mere exercise in pseudointellectualism.

>I also find your rebuttles to why the Bible sucks mediocre and uninspiring, basically I could do better.
I honestly don't care enough about the bible, and given that my opponent is a reddit LARPer who himself hasn't read the book and isn't aware of its historical context, I have no motivation to cast pearls before the swine.

>>21396506
Descartes, Langan and Weininger deserve some respect for being mostly factually right.

>>21395726
I have read Unreal Just by MARDUK

>>21396530
>mostly
So what exactly does Langan get wrong, if you don't mind explaining

>>21395726
Culture of Critique.

>>21396552
For example Langan's postulate that telic recursion aims to optimize its contents with respect to a generalized "utility function". The existence of such a function is begging the question, is an unnecessary restriction and adds no explanatory value. I also disagree with his rejection of Cartesian dualism and his inclusion of qualia into the realm of things amenable to an SCSPL computational model. Unfortunately, he doesn't even attempt to justify this claim in his original text.

>>21396517
>There are none.
Alright, you have one last chance, pick three school of philosophy and write out a coherent essay on that school of philosophy. If you are as genius as you claim, you could do this in under five minutes, typing it out as you go, go go go prove you are not a pseud.

>>21396585
Cont'd: He is also clearly wrong in asserting the speed of light as a limit for the processing speed of reality's SCSPLs. This is in contradiction with the instaneous collapse of the wave function in well known paradoxes regarding quantum entanglement.

>>21396604
Lmao kid, try using a GPT bot if you're that desperate to get help with your 500 word essay due tomorrow.

>>21395944
Best suggestion so far. I'll definitely want to go deeper into Arabic literature in the future.

>>21396312
What's his most important book? Reading his Wikipedia his ideas seem similar to those of Stephen Wolfram.

>>21396546
Is this a meme like COTC? I didn't find anything other than Amazon links and the only review is only talks about memes instead of the contents of the book.

>>21396556
Is it just pseudoscience /pol/ ramblings like Wikipedia says or is there any cultural depth in it? I'm not convinced yet. Need more information.

>High IQ polymath here with an insatiable desire for deepest intellectual insights. Coming from a STEM background I've read almost all masterpieces of world literature. I also read almost all philosophical works, which to my big disappointment turned out to be utterly trivial. I am now looking for new material to satisfy my need for intellectual stimulation.

>>21395726
my diary

>>21396727
No it's my book. I'm posting to overcome cowardice.

>>21396739
Based. Post link to the PDF.

>>21396727
>Is it just pseudoscience /pol/ ramblings like Wikipedia says
You aren't a wise man.

>>21396769
https://books.googleusercontent.com/books/content?req=AKW5QaeJWoQmRQBj8YCdwPYbydJFLSBjayrWDA1gc1cOJXl0pZiSNmYUpMVG2BX0XY2oPLbGt2wawuOtRTAFOCUiyidNHPHAFnF7yNg5xviOsuruVrw6GVSx0bVNZBQkl8xshtNm6v72RQ3BgbLOgTGBwwhGtQp_TpW945YMsOciAWXgXQTIC1olPyz8EvdlorDUnBdWQyoJui5-UViDnj7GvzSnOvUWMe3y16OszSnhmP1ZfhhOhvBYadOeeMmXuOXUNg6OVOn-

i cant tell if this is bait or youre unironically retarded

>>21396631
midwit confirmed
/thread

>>21396243
No, it wouldn't. You only following your own proclivities, or finding your own limits.

>>21395941
Nope, sorry. It still isn't, although works like that one are very valuable.

>>21395767
Langan is retarded tho

>>21395726
>Coming from a STEM background
Stopped reading there to be honest.

>>21395766
Bible isn't literature you dork. Enjoy your fairy tales

>>21395919
Did a pastor touch you?

>>21396774
Lmao go suck pol's dick faggot

>>21398133
>tho

>>21395726
Probably Stud Horse from 1994, by Anon Author


>Then she revealed to him her decadent plan. He watched as
her heavy breasts rose and fell in excitement as she told him of
her evil desire.
"I want you to build for me an unusual contraption. It must
be shaped like a small stall and made of wood."
"Whatever for, madam.
"Just listen. The stall must be raised on a platform. There
must be a leather harness that will fit around a horse's back."
She probed his eyes with her own, those big, black jewels that
always glistened with untold desire.
"Yes, madam, I'm listening."
"The contraption must be designed in such a way that I can
slip underneath it while the horse is set in place."
"Madam, you don't mean ..."
"Quiet, Mullady, and just listen. Do not worry, you will be
amply rewarded. But your discretion is imperative in this case."
"I understand, madam."
"The contraption must be built in the back of the old tool
shed that is rarely used. Have you got that?"
"Yes, in the old tool shed."
"Of course, Mr. Barker must know absolutely nothing about
this. You will assist me when the time comes."
"Madam, are you sure this is what you desire?"
"I will not be questioned about it Mullady. I've been
thinking about the idea all my life. Now the time has come."
"But in the story books, madam, where it has been recorded
that this kind of thing has been done before, it has often proved
fatal."
"That is a chance I am prepared to take. All I insist upon
is your loyalty and cooperation. Can I count on it."
"Of course you can, madam. I shall do anything you request,
although I do not agree and fear for your safety."
"That is not your concern. When the time comes I will hold
to my word and you shall receive a fine reward for your efforts."

>>21395726
>Scripture
Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John), Job, Ecclesiastes, Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, and Revelations.
>Theology
Protrepticus by Clement of Alexandria, Meditation on the Tarot by Anonymous, and Development of Christian Doctrine by St. John Henry Newman
>Philosophy secular
Timaeus by Plato, Will and Representation by Schopenhauer, and Imperium by Yockey

>>21395893
>we're right and you're wrong.
Is the we here with you right now?
>The bible is an interesting read from a historical perspective because of its cultural impact on western literature, but overall it's not a deep or insightful book.
Didn't you just admit that you had not read it?
>Reading it doesn't change the reader's world view,
Now if this isn't the finest misuse of rhetoric this side of eternity I don't know what is.
>and if christcuckery hadn't been the dominant religion for so many centuries,
For no reason whatsoever.
>the bible would be just another mediocre work of fiction.
Again, which you simultaneously have not read, say has historical value, and then say that it is a fairytale - so could you at least pick a consistent point?

>>21398138
>Bible isn't literature you dork. Enjoy your fairy tales
So the Bible is not literature, as if that is a good thing, but then use made up stories as an insult which is the very thing that defines literature. Oh, the power of genius level IQ without Christ. This is just too easy.

>>21395726
The pickle rick episode

>>21398859
Where did I ever say I didn't read it?

>>21395726
>I also read almost all philosophical works, which to my big disappointment turned out to be utterly trivial.
brainlet confirmed

>>21399702
>it's another episode of dogmatic philosoplebs not being able to cope with criticism
Many such cases. Sad.

>>21395780
Read Augustine as your aperitif. He will crumble your pseud pretentions

>High IQ
>STEM background
That's like saying a Ti-89 has a high IQ

>>21395893
Nah as a gentile atheist I can attest that the Bible is not some incidental bullshit, it’s apparent superficiality veils depths which are nigh boundless

>>21396295
I fucking wish christianity dominated our culture. Western culture has been antichrist for centuries now

>>21396530
Lol. Incel. But if you insist on being spiritually blind yet high IQ, read Mitchell Heisman

>>21399745
For social "science" and philosophy plebs high school was unironically harder than their PhD because in high school they had to do math classes.

>>21395726
Honestly if you understood all the philosophy you allegedly read you wouldn't care for further 'intellectual stimulation'. Maybe you try again ?

>>21399771
>if you jerked off into a public toilet once in a while you wouldn't care about sex with hot women anymore
Sure thing, buddy. Keep projecting your lack of intellectual ambition.

>>21398868
Your pedantry is not amusing

>>21399684
So you have read it? Or you have not and you are merely implicitly criticising my presumption for obvious clues?
>>21400061
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pedantry
I can neither spell embarrassing without looking it up nor do I know anything about grammar and so my pedantry is towards thought as such and not thought as it is packaged.

>>21395726
Okay, Mr Genius. Give me one of your original yet groundbreaking philosophical musings that put into perspective the works of the so-called 'greats' such that they're rendered trivial

>>21400129
I have yet to compile all my wisdom into a single PDF. Until then you'll need to look out for the posts with frog pictures attached to them, scattered around on /lit/ and /sci/. Many of these are mine and contain deepest philosophical truths.

>>21400137
Very droll, but, for instance, I have an exam on epistemology coming up, so that can be nice and brief for you.
You should be able to give better elucidation & ideas on the subject than say Gettier and Goldman (or at least why they're wrong) in an insignificant amount of time.

>>21400148
Thanks for asking. Gettier is the quintessential example of what's wrong with philosophy. The most retarded and infantile player of utterly pointless language games. What he wrote is a gross insult to any intellectual reader. It is dull, intellectually undemanding. Given the ridiculous and futile attempt of providing rigorous definitions for natural language terms like "knowledge", any illiterate preschooler with an elementary grasp of his own language could have come up with such counterexamples. However, the worst part is Gettier's conclusion. Instead of recognizing the futility of his endeavor he proposes to continue with the childish language games, as if adding more complexity could ever solve the initial problem of natural ambiguity in natural language. An autistic attempt of a philosophical cretin to LARP as a mathematician even though he lacks the IQ to recognize the limits of the latter's methodology. Cringe, cringe, cringe. And btw, absolutely no knowledge was gained in the process. After reading his diarrhea of self-induced confusion over his own language, we still know nothing new about epistemology.

>>21400202
>And my message and my preaching were not in the persuasiveness of the words of philosophy, but in the demonstration of The Spirit and power
>See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ.

>>21400253
One of my problems with Christianity is that its concept of spiritually is inherently cuckoldistic. If my soul was created by god I'd expect a direct connection to god, a personal kind of spiritually. Instead, christcucks want to tell me my only connection to god should be transitively through a prophet who allegedly lived 2000 years ago and whose word is conveyed by an organized institution which wants to turn my kids into trannies.

>>21400202
And yet you seem like you've not read Gettier. In fact, you seem very similar to him as well. He writes very clearly & to the point, and his point is essentially the same as yours: the current theories in philosophy are wrong & stupid. If you could please point me to this 'conclusion' Gettier reached you execrate so much; it certainly is not referenced much at all.

>>21395726
>Tell me, /lit/, what's the deepest intellectual text you've ever read?
Unironically, Rationality: AI to Zombies

>>21400314
Gettier did indeed not present a solution in the 3 pages of his original text. But the entire context shows his intention to promote the perversion of retarded language games. First of all, the premise of his text is already stupid. He intentionally misinterprets the JTB characterization of knowledge as a proposition in first order logic, hereby abusing mathematical concepts of logic by taking them out of context and misapplying them to natural language. Secondly, his lack of own conclusions or own proposed solutions is not a merit but in fact an indicator of his low IQ and his immorality. A proper philosopher would have ended the text with an apology for writing such cringe, and a lengthy explanation of why he only did so in order to highlight how not to do philosophy. However, as the history of this debate shows, the only reactions which followed were equally retarded language games. Just a shit show of "hurr durr maybe we can fix it by adding another shady condition to JTB, oh no, there's a new Gettier problem disproving it". What a waste of time. An absolute disgrace.

>>21400137
Smart frogposter

>>21400391
Huh?

>>21400278
>One of my problems with Christianity is that its concept of spiritually is inherently cuckoldistic.
Insult with implicit but not real context - many such cases.
>If my soul was created by god I'd expect a direct connection to god, a personal kind of spiritually.
Excellent critique - read up on Catholicism's conception of Natural Law (St. Thomas Aquinas) and the Holy Spirit. These are both held as valid realities.
> Instead, christcucks want to tell me my only connection to god should be transitively through a prophet
The key you are missing is poor cultural catechesis from my brothers in faith. The connection to God the Father is enabled fully through Christ but the spiritual components of God's providence through the Holy Spirit is also possible. Said otherwise, the official Catholic teaching is that the difference between Catholicism and its sacraments to an independent spiritual person is the difference between New York City and a man in a tent in terms of providing shelter unto living a morally upright life (as defined by selflessness along Christ's terms most perfectly summarized in the Sermon on the Mount).
> who allegedly lived 2000 years ago
The historical evidence for Jesus is shockingly strong for someone of his historical placement.
>and whose word is conveyed by an organized institution
There are many schools that are not. All religions, even independent ones, are "organized" but the difference between individual and collective faith is how well organized. A solo go of religion will be poorly organized.
> which wants to turn my kids into trannies.
Transgenderism of children is formally child abuse according to Holy Father Pope Francis.

>>21400467
Just to continue on this - the Catholic faith should not be a stumbling block towards approaching the teachings of Jesus. Approach Jesus, who to me and eventually all is Yahweh and Lord, as one who would approach Buddha and do not look for what but why. The Church is what Christ gave to us, but not as we give gifts as heavenly things are given, and as such the Church itself is an alternative to DNA in the form of embodied divine logos. I do, however, firmly think that Jesus of Nazareth, Christ, must be dealt with first for someone of your intellectual stature because otherwise you will never receive the truth therein. If you are curious as to the most intellectually difficult portion of all of Scripture it is Psalm 19 and the Gospel of St. John when Christ discusses how the Son and the Father relate. This solves all theory of mind. Addtlitionally, St. Augustines on the Trinity is easily the foundation of all metaphysical-phenomonology.

>>21400391
Please explain how this is at essence anything different from what you're doing: just lamenting ideas without providing anything of significance yourself

>>21400721
The difference is that Gettier is an academic philosopher. Morally I'd expect a higher level of discourse from him than from a random shitpost on 4channel. The fact that my post has more content and more depth than his published paper says a lot about the absolute state of acadummia in the second half of the 20th century. I did not put much effort into my post, merely sloppily conveying my opinion, yet this was enough to completely destroy the retards in the philosophy department. If I were to prepare a text for serious publication according to my own standards I'd revolutionize philosophy, but then again this would be pearls before the swine and hence not worth my time.

>>21400750
You did not 'completely destroy' anything. You merely suggested it was irrelevant and stupid.
Clearly with your intelligence, whatever creative endeavour will be 'pearls before the swine', so this is no reason to revolutionize philosophy. Considering philosophy is probably the most influential subject if you were to attempt it, I see no reason why you wouldn't--even if it is to inform the future generations' geniuses.
What about just focusing on the philosophy of science? Science has drastically improved the human condition immeasurably; if you could revolutionize that, human progress would be drastically increased.

>>21400789
There is no such thing as philosophy of science. The scientific method is settled. It works perfectly fine and requires no philosophical modifications. You can of course in addition describe the historical, social, political and economic context of science but this has been done countless times already, and a mere description is certainly below the level of what I consider intellectually worthwhile. Some other people are wasting their time prescribing whatever moral values to science, wanting to dictate what science should or shouldn't do. Again, this is pointless once you are aware of the aforementioned contexts of science.

>>21400750
>>21400202
>>21400804

mathematics is just useless number games. you're making up assertions, then jumping from conclusion to conclusion finally saying "wow, i have a solution!". pointless equations about numbers don't exist anywhere in the real world. it's a cult of retards whose only practical application is to teach other cultists in their same voodoo

>>21400804
Lol. Absolute midwit take. Please explain why the philosophy of science cannot be improved & you cannot create any other useful alternatives

>>21400816
>t.

>>21400818
There is nothing to be improved and there is no need for an alternative to something that is unnecessary in the first place.

>>21400804
Feyerabend.

Good night scientismus pride.

>>21401511
>Feyerabend: Science is just arbitrary dogma.
>Me: Philosophy is just arbitrary dogma.
>Feyerabend *choking on his onions milk*: NOOO, HOW DARE YOU? YOU CAN'T SAY THAT BECAUSE ... UHM YOU JUST CAN'T, OKAY? PHILOSOPHY IS LE HECKIN VALID BECAUSE I SAY SO.

>>21401599
Nah mate, Feyerabend would just cough heavily, pull the extractor cone out so he got more fresh air, then pass the bong over. You seem new to ultimate bantsmanry.

>>21395919
>There isn't a single written work which can compare on the face of the Earth
But there is because the Bible stole all of its stories from Egypt and mesopotamia. I like how nobody has addressed this point yet.

>>21395893
>The bible is an interesting read from a historical perspective
how are you supposed to read something from a historical perspective?

>>21402641
As an intervention into Canaanite polytheistic high place female worship, and polytheistic plural spatial male worship?

You know: the actual complexity of Canaan not duplicating the simple story of the bible? North Canaan Yhwh worship evidence? Yhwh the bull god? The exiles as leavening radicalisation of temple centric patriarchal worship as opposed to pluralistic rural worship? Fear of Asherah and her giant penis. (Picture related).

>>21395726
read through this and then you'll be ready to join the big-boy threads

>>21395726
berdan's us sharpshooters in the army of the potomac 1861-1864

>>21399789
Intellectual ambition is analogous to cooming for you? The anon that pointed out it's your soul you're searching for was spot on.. gonna have to think outside the box on that one sparky.. which for "high iq polymaths" I'm sure thats a hard box to break out of..

>>21395726

>>21395726
Maybe you could take a stab at checking Mochizuki's claimed proof of the abc conjecture. It's about 500 pages
Part 1: http://www.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~motizuki/Inter-universal%20Teichmuller%20Theory%20I.pdf
Part 2: http://www.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~motizuki/Inter-universal%20Teichmuller%20Theory%20II.pdf
Part 3: http://www.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~motizuki/Inter-universal%20Teichmuller%20Theory%20III.pdf
Part 4: http://www.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~motizuki/Inter-universal%20Teichmuller%20Theory%20IV.pdf

>>21400391
So at what point did the rest of you figure out it was a chatbot?

>>21403282
This has been addressed here: >>21400816

Picture related. You need to understand French to be able to grasp how deep the text is. Only people with low IQ read in English, anyways.

>>21400816
>>21403303
OP asked for intellectual text. Usefulness is irrelevant. I would also add that most highly intellectual activities are "useless".

>>21400202
> absolutely no knowledge was gained in the process
Funny you mention that, as your post doesn’t contain a single argument

>>21395726
Is OP a master baiter or a genu-ine pretentious retard? We may never be certain.

>>21400314
I object to the following:
>You seem very similar to him as well. He writes very clearly and to the point
>>21400202
>>21400391
These posts are horrendously written. I thought OP was a troll, but it seems he's just a zombie. Sad!

>>21403391
>These posts are horrendously written.
English is my third language (my first language, coming before my mother tongue, is math). I don't have much respect for the English language. Its shallowness and simplicitly is inadequate for the purpose of expressing my deep thoughts. Nonetheless, if the only point you can reasonably criticize is my writing style, I'm happy to see that you agree with the factual content of my post.

>>21403342
Argument? I'm not arguing opinions here, I'm stating facts. Nice "tu quoque" fallacy btw.

>>21403497
>Argument? I'm not arguing opinions here, I'm stating facts.
Eh, the natural ambiguity in natural language makes it rather ambiguous.

>>21403502
Congratulations, looks like you learned something from my post.

>>21395726
its called "fiction"

>>21395726
Grug and the green paint.

>>21400816
>he posts on his computer

>>21395726

>>21400202
>philosopher: tries to make commonly used clear concept adequately definite by refuting a common misconception
>truly enlightened anon: shames philosopher because any attempt at making clear concepts definite is pointless because language is naturally ambiguous
Very embarrassing. All this tells me is that you put absolutely no effort into trying to make your concepts definite because it is impossible to make your definitions perfectly reflect the concept, as if approximations to it's natural meaning weren't possible. Your mind must be chaos.

>>21405379
>>21400202
To specify, your error is you set up a false logical opposition between complete ambiguity and being perfectly describable, ignoring shades of perfection of description and ambiguity. I can use this as a generator or reductio ad absurdum arguments against your post but I feel it is more instructive if I give you the core error.

>>21395726
>>21395766
>>21395893
>Reading it doesn't change the reader's world view, and if christcuckery hadn't been the dominant religion for so many centuries, the bible would be just another mediocre work of fiction.
This. But the literature on NDEs and the book in pic related actually crushes even hardened skeptics, whereas the Bible and the Qu'ran convinces very few people.

Of course, nothing gets normies and NPCs more uncomfortable than the idea that NDEs are ACTUALLY real, and that there are valid reasons to think that they are and that we should take them seriously.

Here is an extremely persuasive argument for why NDEs are real:

https://youtu.be/U00ibBGZp7o

It makes a huge deal about the fact that NDErs are representative of the population as a whole, and that when people go deep into the NDE, they all become convinced. As this article points out:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/mysteries-consciousness/202204/does-afterlife-obviously-exist

>"Statistics collected show that the "deeper" the NDE the greater the percentage of those who come away certain of the existence of the afterlife. Among those with the deepest experiences 100 percent came away agreeing with the statement, "An afterlife definitely exists"."

Since NDErs are representative of the population as a whole, and they are all convinced, then 100% of the population become convinced that there is an afterlife when they have a sufficiently deep NDE themselves. And so would you, me, or anyone, including the most dogmatic atheists and skeptics, because it is VASTLY more self-evidently real than this brief little experience of life on Earth we have now. When you dream and wake up, you instantly realize that life is more real than your dreams. When you have an NDE, the same thing is happening, but on a higher level, as you immediately realize that life is the deep, deep dream and the NDE world is the undeniably real world by comparison.

>>21405379
>>21405395
Said philosopher did not make anything "adequately definite". On the contrary, he committed a gross categorical error and invited others to commit the same error. He contributed to the intellectual demise of epistemology. A proper epistemologist would concern xirself with various ways of gaining knowledge and their pros and cons. We don't need a rigorous definition (which for obvious reasons is impossible anyway) for this, an intuitive understanding of the word is totally sufficient. What Gettier produced is the opposite of knowledge. It is logico-linguistic trannyism and its result is as grossly undesirable as a neovagina.

>>21403391
They're AI generated

Not the OP, but I am interested in some actual answers to his post. I've been going through /lit/s top 100 in order to develop better taste in literature. While many of the books have been good, I'm kind of disappointed that they weren't really as perspective changing as I had hoped.
I just want to read unusual books, I suppose, not just the best ones. Any suggestions?

>>21405402
>afterlife
Cope for the weak

>>21395726
>Coming from a STEM background I've read almost all masterpieces of world literature. I also read almost all philosophical works, which to my big disappointment....

the reads how a dumb person thinks a smart person would write

>>21395726
How about you post your version here first? Then we'll try to measure up to you.

>>21395726
Go away I hate academics

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91gT68xeDMM

>>21406529
Your IQ envy is showing.

>>21395726
>ctrl+f
>no Kant
el goblin is your choice

>>21395726
The Use and Abuse of Art by Jacques Barzun
The Museum of Eterna's Novel by Macedonio Fernandez
Passion According to G.H. by Lispector

If you can appreciate all three of these works you're more intellectual than 99.5% of all humans who've ever existed.

>>21395726
Try:

Shinichi Mochizuki:

Inter-universal Teichmüller Theory.

I: Construction of Hodge Theaters.
II: Hodge-Arakelov-theoretic Evaluation.
III: Canonical Splittings of the Log-theta-lattice.
IV: Log-volume Computations and Set-theoretic Foundations.

>>21403485
>Its shallowness and simplicitly is inadequate for the purpose of expressing my deep thoughts.
This is just blatantly ridiculous. English, even though it is a colonial tongue for me and is stained with the passions of heretics, apostates, and atheistic and fleshy poets through and through is still a verbal onslaught of synonyms, nooks and crannies of every little predilection for each derelict of syntax and syllogism alike. Also, have you read the Holy Bible yet or is your fantasy world still to your momentary liking?

>to my big disappointment
>high IQ
yeah right.

>>21395780
>Bible
>collection of bronze age stories
I know hope you're just baiting anon, but I've had to deal with retards who unironically believe this. All of the books in the Bible would've been written well after the bronze age, and most of the stories themselves take place after the bronze age as well. I also don't know how it "trannified" Egyptian and mesopotamian polytheism into monotheism again, assuming someone sincerely believes this. It's just saying that the only god worth worshipping is the uncreated Creator, as opposed to the rest of the elohim (gods) which are mere creatures.

>>21395726
You reek of pseudfaggotry. I hope this is a larp.