/lit/ - Literature

>>22314801
This book pushes nihilism to its ultimate conclusion by linking revisionary naturalism in Anglo-American philosophy with anti-phenomenological realism in French philosophy. Contrary to the 'post-analytic' consensus uniting Heidegger and Wittgenstein against scientism and scepticism, this book links eliminative materialism and speculative realism.

Christ cuck seethe incoming though most of them probably never even heard of it.

>>22314801
It's political philosophy but this book is pure genius. Also, an extra special hello to my FBI agents for this post - uwu <3

Agamben, The Kingdom and the Glory

https://energeticprocession.wordpress.com/2022/10/22/the-four-horsemen-of-palamism/

>>22314801
picrel for sure. And I've read After Finitude too.
>>22314801
Still need to read this. Good of him to go the other route of uniting realism in both camps rather than uniting nonrealism as tended to be the case during the 70s. But I thought he liked Sellars, who is a pragmatist? Even Sellarsians like the Churchlands (eliminative materialists par excellence) are pragmatists too.

>>22314801
Michael J. Almeida presents a powerful argument which holds that several widely believed and largely undisputed objections to the idea of the existence of God are in fact just philosophical dogmas. He challenges some of the most well-entrenched principles in philosophical theology, which have served as basic assumptions in influential apriori, atheological arguments. But most theists also maintain that the principles express apriori necessary truths, including those principles that are presumed to follow from the nature of an essentially omnipotent, essentially omniscient, essentially perfectly good and necessarily existing being. Among the atheological arguments that deploy these philosophical dogmas are the Logical Problem of Evil, the Logical Problem of the Best Possible World, the Logical Problem of Good Enough Worlds, the Problem of Divine Freedom, the Problem of No Best World, and the Evidential Problem of Evil. In Freedom, God, and Worlds Almeida claims that these
arguments present no important challenge to the existence of an Anselmian God. Not only are these philosophical principles false, they are necessarily false.

>>22314801
Good counter to all the theist / magical consciousness bullshit books out there.:
1. Nothing that goes on in the brain violates the predictions of physical science.
2. If there were an immaterial soul affecting the brain this would lead to a violation of physical formulas. Therefore,
3. There is no non-physical soul that might survive bodily death.

>>22315340
Wrong.

>>22315340
Oh hooo!!! So deconstructive and heartily delighting.

>>22315024
whatever it may be, I'm running out of toilet paper and could use some.

>>22315253
Sellars being a pragmatists means literally nothing to anyone

>>22315024
I like how the title looks like the author's name at first glance.
It's what gives the particular "it" to the cover.

>>22314801
not technically recent, as the drafts date back to the 1990s, but I plan to read this eventually since I'm studying a bit of communications theory

>>22315253
Hèlas, what is this book?

>>22315440
Good call. Too dumb to understand it anyway.

>>22314801
>>22315024
You don't need any of this if you've read Ligotti and Land.

>>22315611
>Ligotti
isn't a philosopher and not able to formalize this thoughts into concepts like emilimativism.

>>22314801
Schelling contra Meillassoux
>Focusing on the central striking claim that there is something rather than nothing – that all necessity is consequent – Tritten engages with a wide range of ancient as well as contemporary philosophers including Quentin Meillassoux, Richard Kearney, Friedrich Schelling, Émile Boutroux and Markus Gabriel. He examines the ramifications of this truth arguing that even reason and God, while necessary according to essence, are utterly contingent with respect to existence.

>>22315444
It means a lot to all his followers. Rorty, McDowell, Brandom, the Churchlands, etc. They're all neopragmatists too.

Structure and Being - Lorentz B. Puntel

Basically reclaims philosophy’s ability to create a systematic theory.

Philosophy after Hegel is a massive waste of time

>>22316142
>Basically reclaims philosophy’s ability to create a systematic theory.
or we could just go back to Hegel

>>22316142
did you read the whole thing?

>>22315941
pragmatism lost its mystical edge after James died. its quite the tragedy.

>>22315611
>resigning yourself to nihilism
we need a new Nietzsche

>>22316380
are neopragmatists more bugmanlike?

>>22316440
quite a bit. none of them really expand on Jamesan theology. most are shit-tier ethicists or logicians.

>>22315340
5g of magic mushrooms or a meaningful prayer life says you're wrong

>>22316380
I agree, but James is good in spite of being a pragmatist, not because of it. His sensitivity to religious feeling is residual of older romantic philosophy, comparable to the subjectivism of early existentialists like Kierkegaard and Nietzsche.
>>22316142
>>22316342
I'm curious if people have read the Puntel book too. Sounds interesting but not sure how far it goes.
>>22315470
Have you read this book yet anon you've shilled it before, it sounds interesting, but nobody seems to have read the whole thing yet.

>>22317354
>Have you read this book yet anon
nope. just skim through it on breaks and lunches like the pseud I am. heres the link to pdf if you'd like to do the same:

https://theses.gla.ac.uk/2741/1/2002burgessphd.pdf

Kinda moreso anthro than pure phil but this book blows me away. Very deeply theoretical but also engaged with practically. Draws on D&G and Clastres but goes beyond. Responsible for the so-called ontological turn. Hard to describe but kinda bizarro Heideggerian and Laruellean approach to anthro which crosses over to phil too. Lotsa anti-oedipal stuff. But curiously creates a post-humanism that is not anti-human. Plus shamanism and cannibalism and fun stuff.

>>22317360
Thanks for the pdf anon, much appreciated

>>22314801

>>22315340
>1. Nothing that goes on in the brain violates the predictions of physical science.
That's a big, unscientific shit of an assumption dumped onto a page right there.

>>22317562
Gay choice. Entry level Thomism. Feser has nothing on other innovative modern Christian folks like Balthasaar and Lubac and Pryzwara and Ulrich and Marion. I suppose they are moreso 20th than 21st tho.

>>22317575
If I beg the question and assume scientism is correct then scientism wins every argument! I'm a genius
>stemlords be like

>>22317609
>innovative
The thread is meant to be about important books, not innovation. Innovativeness is not important to philosophy, which is concerned with the eternal, not the "new."
>I suppose they are moreso 20th than 21st tho.
If I could recommend books prior to the 21st, I would just tell you to read the Summa Theologiae and SCG.

>>22317620
Aw. It's retarded

>>22317620
>Innovativeness is not important to philosophy, which is concerned with the eternal, not the "new."
Not true, only true for mystic perennialist 4channers who are not true philosophers. Any "eternal" philosophy you want to accept is an innovation, if you REALLY cared about the old stuff go read Sumerian crap from 3000 BC and see what """"philosophy"""" you can get out of it. Answer: nothing. Every step from Thales forward was an innovation. Improvements were made over time.

>>22317648
You're conflating "eternal" with "old." Poor reading comprehension.

Laruelle vs. Dreyfus

An anthropological refutation of all post-Lacanist claims to truth, in the elegant form of a (missing) argument about the post-Kantian metaphysics of the subject. The ramification of this lie strikes with a phantasmagorical thesis: white lives matter. Nonrealism is trampled to dust by the chariot of Neoplatonic post-dogma. In the hands of the African Plotinus is a baton with which he beats at the arguments of Jayleuze and Du-Attari. Becoming a thug. Becoming a New Dirty Bastard. Part one.

>>22317555
>cannibalism
>Draws on D&G
I am shocked

>>22317696
Blah. Eternal can be discovered both new and anew. I actually like old mythopoetic stuff. Aquinas was however innovative in his own time and is certainly not the only doctor of the church nor the all time peak of the discipline of theology or philosophy. Many older philosophical assumptions must be updated due to new developments in epistemology and so on. I can appreciate the classics and oft they have much to teach. Feser however strikes me as an author with few ideas of his own beyond bring back thomism. Others mentioned in my post as innovative draw upon thomist ideas but respond to historical changes to the discipline of philosophy. I find this very satisfying and enlightening. But to each his own.

>>22317609
I agree. Norris Clarke mogs Feser any day of the week.

>>22317744
Who is the peak?

>>22317736
New * Dealty * Bass Tarde

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yx7mIu2qspw

>>22314801
It's threads like these that make me truly thankful to have been rejected from PhD in academia. The obsessive usage of "movements" and intellectual "schools" of thought is so beyond moronic and to say that something is "American" or "French" philosophy is undeserving of the term philosophy in every sense of it. I don't know how people can even write, let alone read, things like "post-Kantian metaphysics" and not want to vomit.

>>22317763
= EVROP3AN AKK(K)ADEMIAH

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOrmFGEFlCc

>>22317775
!= AMERICAN ONE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOQKK_dvxJU

>>22317744
>Blah. Eternal can be discovered both new and anew.
Naturally, but I fail to see how innovation per se is relevant to the importance of any particular philosophy. If something is eternally true, then innovation is irrelevant to its truth, because it is beyond all constraints of time, therefore both antiquity and innovation are not strictly relevant. Whether someone in the past did or didn't know about it is, again, irrelevant to its truth.
>nor the all time peak of the discipline of theology or philosophy.
If you read the book I recommended, you would be able to provide counterarguments to those given. I'm not concerned with a random personal opinion of what is or isn't true, I'm recommending an important book, which contains many important arguments pertaining to the eternal truth. For those who are interested in truth as such, and not something that will be popular ("true") today, and then unpopular ("untrue") tomorrow, which is simply a waste of limited time.
>Many older philosophical assumptions must be updated due to new developments in epistemology and so on.
If you read the book, you can find the Thomistic response to what you think are valid objections. Which is why I think the book is important in the modern context, simply because it directly responds to mistakes later philosophers (later than Aquinas and many other Church fathers and doctors) made without realizing what they were doing.

>>22315611
>>22315762
Ligotti shows his philosophical chops too. Text by the increasingly based Hickman:

>Ligotti's rejection of the post-Kantian tradition is absolute. His rejection of any humanism whatsoever, and its belief in the sovereignty of the Self, and his utter rejection of the correlationist tradition of a two-world system based upon the combined self/world connection in either its 'weak correlationist' or 'strong correlationist' stances(see note*), leads to Ligotti's nemocentric stance: "the absolute indifference of the real to the human and the personal through a metaphysical irrealism in which he disentangles appearances from both sufficient reason and originary manifestation by severing the nomological isomorphism of appearances and their substrate."[13] Trafford goes on to tell us that Ligotti's naturalisation of the neurotechnological puppet-dance of life ends in the "realisation that underlying our parochial self-conceit is the impersonal reality of the meat-puppet," and that "the objectivation of the world indicates its real condition, unveiling the inexorable mechanics of appearances as a prospect of hideous insanity – a hall of mindless mirrors unbound from the densely coiled layers of illusion that characterise the interests of life and the physiology of thought."[14] Trafford summing up this dark gnosis of a post-Kantian sublime tells us that meanwhile "cognitive protectionism and organic enslavement ensure the oneiric aphasia of the shadow of the puppet dance"(ibid. p. 206), quoting Ligotti,

>"To know, to understand in the fullest sense, is to plunge into an enlightenment of inanity, a wintry landscape of memory whose substance is all shadows and a profound awareness of the infinite spaces surrounding us on all sides. Within this space we remain suspended only with the aid of strings that quiver with our hopes and our horrors, and which keep us dangling over the gray void. How is it that we can defend such puppetry, condemning any efforts to strip us of these strings? The reason, one must suppose, is that nothing is more enticing, nothing more vitally idiotic, than our desire to have a name – even if it is the name of a stupid little puppet – and to hold on to this name throughout the long ordeal of our lives, as if we could hold on to it forever. If only we could keep those precious strings from growing frayed and tangled, if only we could keep from falling into an empty sky, we might continue to pass ourselves off under our assumed names and perpetuate our puppet’s dance throughout all eternity."

Cormac McCarthy wore it better imho. And Terminator 2 - another film I will submit for the all-time Acceleration film pantheon - mysteriously had a happy ending and is rewatchable af. Novelists are permitted to be miserable, filmmakers never. Is it all just bucks? Maybe. But bucks well spent.

Maybe heroic tech is a step behind the evil tech from the future coming to kill us.

http://earth-wizard.livejournal.com/47133.html

>>22317696
And you're conflating new with not-eternal. You made this mess. Otherwise you would not oppose innovation, understanding it correctly as progressive discovery of objectivity.

>>22315340

Hahahahaha

Physical matter isn't even real bro

Read this

>>22318164
qrd?

>>22318172

Your mind is messed up and you're missing out on true reality and therefore missing out on meaning and happiness. Like if you ever wondered how some people could be so devout about God, and you just don't seem to "get it," this explains why. Not a religious book but it touches every area of our lives.

Two Arms and a Head: The Death of Newly Paraplegic Philosopher - Clayton Atreus.

It explains nature and human condition based on rigid philosophical analysis (especially from the empirical and western POVs).

What if madness is divinest sense?

What if sense is most vulgar madness?

>>22318439
pic related

>>22318439
>>22318448
This is Ligotti's philosophy. But won't use the word divine

>>22315780
Shouldn't they explain how Schelling is still alive? That would be an incredible revelation.

>>22318580
Schelling died, but he came back

bump

>>22314801
Theory of the Earth - Thomas Nail

bumperino

>>22315340
ah yeah, I forgot the very obvious utility of dreams in the evolutionary process

>>22314801
This one.

>>22315479
The only book in this thread actually taken seriously. Though Meillassoux, Brassier, and Puntel are in second place. The rest are literal whos.

Bump

>>22315253
this one sounds interesting. Added to my list of stuff that I will never get round to reading.

>>22314801
You must change your life by Peter Sloterdijk.
Sounds like a self-help book, but actually is a book about ethics. The correct way to live is to constantly change yourself and practice. All religions are guides to self change and modern world learned how to see the essence of self change

>>22322326
Qrd ?

>>22324555
Heidegger's antisemitism/racism/nazism runs deeper than previously thought and that there was a concerted effort to cover this fact up. The author claims that is impossible to separate this discovery from Heidegger's philosophy, so it is thus 'in ruins'.

>>22324555
>>22324563
NTA. I suggest reading Heidegger's Letter on Humanism. It might clear things up a bit

Bump

>>22324563
Which heidegger are we talking about ? Is it the being and time heidegger or the later mystical heidegger

>>22322326
does this actually go beyond what losurdo already wrote in heidegger and the ideology of war?
that being following ww1 there was a conservative movement in germany rejecting both democracy and communism and therefore being ambivalent or favorable twoards rising facism

What an embarrassing thread.

AAAAAAAAAA

>>22324563
>>22322326
>>22324752
I'm not even a chud but Heidegger is great and this book sounds like pure copium. Sounds worse than Nietzsche Corps(e) even

>>22325425
>but Heidegger is great

he's not, he's a perfect example of why humanities, especially philosophy in the 20th and 21st centuries consists almost entirely of erudite idiots

bump

beep beep