/lit/ - Literature

>>23428723
Cringe homo

based fagtron

>>23428723
Buy an ad, twink.

>>23428723
Any novels? Poems? Plays?

>>23428723
couldn't care less about this shite tbqhwyl

Someone leak the full list I'm not paying to see that shit

I want to fuck that irish twink so bad it's unreal

>paid
lol

>>23428723

>Aristotle's Politics

I'm still buttblasted about his theory of natural slaves. Didn't he know full well from firsthand (and to believe later biographers personal) experience that free citizens can be completely slavish and base? Did he really never encounter an enslaved person who seemed like anything but a sort of herd animal or tool? How could someone be so right about so much, and so wrong about something that's so obvious?

Then again he thought that if a menstruating woman looks in a mirror, the mirror will turn red (De Insomniis).

>>23429388
I thought his point was that anyone could be a slave, irrespective of social or economic status. A citizen could be psychologically a slave, a slave could psychologically be a citizen. Not that I actually read him, but that's how some anon once summarized it.

>>23429436

That's how a modern person would want to read him, but it isn't what the text says.

>>23429436
more like if you're a slave you got what you deserved because if you weren't slavish you wouldn't have been enslaved

>>23429388
>Didn't he know full well from firsthand (and to believe later biographers personal) experience that free citizens can be completely slavish and base? Did he really never encounter an enslaved person who seemed like anything but a sort of herd animal or tool?
He literally addresses all of that. Have you actually read those chapters on the slave by nature, or are you extrapolating from what you suppose he must've meant by "natural slave"?

Cute Woods

>>23429468
Epictetus was born into slavery but clearly not a slave in mind or soul

>>23429481
All stoics are slaves in mind and soul regardless of position.

>>23429481
Take it up with Aristotle

>>23429489
Explain why?

So is anybody going to post the whole list of books or wha

>>23429476
So what is it then?

>>23429476

Billy Hellene was a good and wise man. He practiced philosophy, could play the lyre, and embodied all the virtues. He captured some slaves from a neighboring, non-Greek people and used them as tools.

But eventually Billy Hellene died because of humoral imbalance, and his son Bob took over the estate. Bob was nothing like his father, he only lived to pursue sensible pleasures. He was still the master despite this, even though he was actually even worse than his own barbarian slaves.

Plato made the same point (though not in the context of slavery). Aristotle's case doesn't make sense. I gotta be honest, your post made me unsure, since I've only read the Politics two or three times, but I sat down and read the opening again and yes, what I said is true. You cannot have a slave-based society in which the masters somehow became slaves, and the slaves who were virtuous somehow became masters in turn. That's what you seem to be suggesting, but it isn't in the text. Aristotle isn't talking about a metaphorical slavery, he's talking about literal chattel slavery. If you don't believe me, do what I just did and read the relevant sections.

>>23429514
>>23429565
Why didn't they answer?

>>23428723
Read all this and maybe you, too, can couch your neo-nazi ramblings in philosophical navel-gazing

>>23429489
>>23429514
>>23429673

Not that anon, but in the modern version of stoicism it preaches literal cope as a solution for problems. It preaches thinking out rather than direct, aggressive action. If there is one thing we do not need more of in modernity it is more thinking.

It discourages doing, and disincentivizes immediate action. It rejects anger, wrath, hate and fury as motivations for actions too.

Hatred, not love, motivates that is why atrocity propaganda works and that which focuses on love does not.

>>23429698

You're right, what we really need in the modern people is for people to stop thinking and jump right into direct and aggressive action. That's what a real man would do. A very clever idea. Careful with that thinking, though, you're on the edge here. Better run out and rape or stab someone to bring you back to the real world.

>>23429562
If you want it so bad pay for it, poorfag

>>23429706
Did an anti-stoic diddle you as a boy?

>>23429711
nice psyop keith, when are you converting to islam?

>>23429698
This. A truly assertive person does not get anxious or depressed nor do they shut down even when faced with captivity and enslavement. Do not resist your anger; let if flow through you and be your guide. It is your superpower.
(Unless you were molested or something then you need therapy because your emotions are all fucked up)

>>23429752
The root of anxiety is the refusal to deal with a problems. Stoicism is a self-defeating and self-fueling problem.

Stoic
>have simple problem
>anxiety grows due to problem
>think hard about problem
>problem gets worse
>anxiety gets worse
>think more of new developments
>problem now harder to solve
>anxiety gets worse
>still keep thinking on how to solve the problem

Vitalist
>have problem
>plug hole
>problem solved
>go out with the lads

>>23429665
>Aristotle's case doesn't make sense. I gotta be honest, your post made me unsure, since I've only read the Politics two or three times, but I sat down and read the opening again and yes, what I said is true.
I don't know how much reading "the opening" amounts to for you, but, with due respect, the treatment is more than any single chapter of book 1. Among Aristotle's points:

- The slave by nature is defined by a complete inability to exercise reason, so they're effectively people who can't make decisions for themselves or others. Because their reason is defective, they can only be trusted with physical labor, and only insofar as they have the necessary moral virtues to be trustworthy.

- *Most* slavery is not of natural slaves, but by custom.

- The man led by his passions rather than reason might not be fully a natural slave, but by nature is closer to being a natural slave than the man who exercises his reason. Ergo, the hedonistic master is a master by custom only, not truly, and the slave who exercises more reason than his master is a slave by custom only not truly.

This is more or less the way Aristotle allows himself to critique the customs dominant around him.

>>23429752
>Do not resist your anger; let if flow through you and be your guide. It is your superpower
Almost nobody can do this effectively. You are not Mike Tyson. Almost always, a person who acts out of anger is going to make a fool of themselves and do something regrettable. Better to allow yourself to experience the anger, knowing you'll be better equipped to deal with the source of your anger after it passes.

>>23429855
>Almost nobody can do this effectively. You are not Mike Tyson.
No, this is bullshit. Most people can harness it quite easily after the initial flush of anger. Then it dies down and simmers with which you can commit to a disciplined action that betters you. Be it working out or quitting smoking.


>Better to allow yourself to experience the anger, knowing you'll be better equipped to deal with the source of your anger after it passes.
The source is typically people who frequent your life, you don't get anger at spilling milk.

It's like you've never lashed out at a person who was doing something the group hated. It is immensely satisfying to tell somebody, in a public space, to shut the fuck up. Do it loudly, do it aggressively, do it in anger.

>>23429999
>after the initial flush of anger. Then it dies down and simmers with which you can commit to a disciplined action that betters you.
That's what I said.

>It's like you've never lashed out at a person who was doing something the group hated
Huh?? Lmfao, you're seriously talking about petty, inconsequential interactions with other people like it's fucking warfare lmao. I thought you were talking about meaningful events of misfortune, like running into a severe downturn in your business, or the government trying to fuck you with taxes, or someone trying to steal your clients. You must live an uneventful life if you lash out whenever someone does something mildly annoying. Lol, imagine your "source of anger" being some asshole calling you fat. I can see why people like you shit on stoicism so much if you can't even imagine scenarios more upsetting than someone saying some dumb shit lol.

>>23429855
Everyone can do this, just not everyone knows how to express anger effectively. Anger isn't just sperging out; it's literally an energy source that gets you to accomplish things. If you have issues and anger for you is only impotent screeching then you work on expressing it in a healthier way while processing why your anger is all fucked up, and if you still express it poorly then you apologize after. But the worst thing you can do is rationalize it away stoic style because that's a one way ticket to psychological enslavement, complacency, stagnation, etc.

>>23430140
>Anger isn't just sperging out; it's literally an energy source that gets you to accomplish things.
>It is immensely satisfying to tell somebody, in a public space, to shut the fuck up. Do it loudly, do it aggressively, do it in anger.

>If you have issues and anger for you is only impotent screeching then you work on expressing it in a healthier way
How would you know? Your only source of anger is people being mildly annoying. If you've ever experienced real adversity in life, people saying annoying shit wouldn't trigger you enough to cause you to lash out.

When Stoics talk about dealing with anger, they're not talking about situations that can be as easily solved as telling someone to stfu. If only life were that simple for everyone. No stoicism, or any philosophy for that matter, would be needed.

>the worst thing you can do is rationalize it away stoic style because that's a one way ticket to psychological enslavement, complacency, stagnation, etc.
I'm not a scholar in stoicism, but I'm pretty sure none of the main proponents of stoicism (like Marcus Aurelius or Seneca) encourage this. I'm pretty sure what they teach is that when something leaves an impression on you, first consider whether you can do something about it or not. If you can, do it; if you can't, there is no sense in getting angry. I've never read any stoic saying you should just stifle your anger at all times, but I could be wrong. Your criticism of stoicism (of which I'm not even a serious proponent) seems to be against strawmen.

>>23430179
>Your only source of anger is people being mildly annoying
I think you're confusing me with a different guy
>They don't say to suppress, you're arguing against a strawman
That's what stoics always say but immediately say after (like you just did) to suppress anger, consider whether it's rational to be angry or not, then if it is allow yourself to feel less angry but like still angry or something it's totally not suppression I swear guys. Your emotions and your consciousness are 2 seperate things and through expression and processing you can slowly unite the 2, but resenting your own anger and constantly shutting your emotions down to first consider whether you should have them or not absolutely is suppression.

>>23430046
>Personal interactions don't warrent anger

>>23430179

>find wife is getting dicked down by other men
>go write a bit
>hear other men laughing as i scrible
>hear wife laughing
>keep scribbling
>be Marcus Aurelius

It is the reddit of all Greco-Roman thought.

>>23430216
>but resenting your own anger and constantly shutting your emotions down to first consider whether you should have them or not absolutely is suppression.
Call it what you want, but there are certain things objectively out of your control.
Here's an extremely mundane example: suppose you planned a fishing trip with your son weeks in advance, ensuring the weather forecast is good that day. But suppose the forecast was wrong, and the weather sucks. Do you scream at the sky? Genuinely, I'm really curious how an anti-stoic would respond to that. From what I've read, a stoic would tell you it's ok to naturally feel disappointment, but it would make no sense to let it grow into something worse.

>>23430218
You're fundamentally soft as fuck if someone saying something annoying elicits an angry response from you. The absolute irony is that by lashing out in anger, you make yourself look even weaker. You'll be the subject of a Karen video one day.

>>23430225
Does stoicism say that if your wife is cheating on you (something you have control over), that you should do nothing? Isn't that the diametric opposite of what I said: >I'm pretty sure what they teach is that when something leaves an impression on you, first consider whether you can do something about it or not. If you can, do it; if you can't, there is no sense in getting angry
Or are you doubling down on strawmen?

>>23430311
It doesn't matter what makes sense or not, you feel the way you do. Emotions come before thoughts. Some people might be chill about it and think "Oh well, maybe another time," while someone else might be pissed the fuck off and destroyed by it. In that case you don't just say "I shouldn't be mad about this... All better :D." I guess you could but if you're getting pissed off about something truly outside your control like the weather then it's not really about the weather - maybe it was a chance to connect with your son who you feel like you've failed or you're stressed at work from a shitty job and now the weather ruined the one day off you get. You don't control whether something grows or not, it grows and you can suppress to save face but your baseline response won't change until you take your emotions seriously regardless of how rational they are.

>>23430333
>you don't just say "I shouldn't be mad about this... All better :D."
I disagree. There are things that happen in your life that you have to learn to accept. Some people are born without arms or legs or eyes. Learning how to accept things you have objectively no control over is a necessary part of life.

>You don't control whether something grows or not, it grows and you can suppress to save face but your baseline response won't change until you take your emotions seriously regardless of how rational they are.
That's not true. I used to have anger issues. You can change your baseline response by training yourself to be rational in the face of negative stimuli. For me, this involved self reflection on what I considered to be important in life. Most things aren't, and thus most things don't warrant my anger.

So no one's got the full list?

>>23430380
>That's not true. I used to have anger issues. You can change your baseline response by training yourself to be rational in the face of negative stimuli. For me, this involved self reflection on what I considered to be important in life. Most things aren't, and thus most things don't warrant my anger.
That's why you angrily argue with strangers on 4chan? Why can't you just "accept" people have different opinions than you? Do you have control over other people's thoughts?

>>23430388
Just spend 25 shekels boyium

>>23428723
Isn't that the faggot that guzzles Nick Fuentes cum?

>>23430485
He's cranky the Jews stole his pot o' gold

>>23430542
lol

>>23428723
God imagine his pale smooth twink ass getting stretched out by Nick’s mighty mutt cock as he cries out for Kami wishing he would come back.

>>23429782
Or pretending that those illusions are problems.

Since people are talking about vope I'd like to remind the illiterate people here that cope means to deal with a difficult situation successfully. Also, you effectively choose your problems. The truth is that yoy just want to be angry all the time out of habit and retardation. But no matter how angry you get about something, we all know that you are never going to actually do anything about it.

>>23430401
Why do you think he's angry? Further, why do you lash out by calling him angry? Because being angry is a sign of weakness and insecurity?

If any Keith Woods paypigs can shill the full list that'd be great.

>>23429198

>>23428723
Gib list plz

>>23430894
>Why do you think he's angry?
Tone, plus why else would respond for so long?
>Further, why do you lash out by calling him angry?
I'm not "lashing out" anymore than all my other replies are "lashing out". After denying stoicism encourages suppression and absurdly claiming that through some Pavlonian exercise in willpower he now only feels anger when it's rationally appropriate having transcended caring about the unimportant things in life, I pointed out that the stoic can claim they can consciously control their anger yet their actions reveal the truth of how their emotions really work. It was all a big cope and denial of reality.
>Because being angry is a sign of weakness and insecurity?
In some cases, yes, but generally no.

>>23430401
>That's why you angrily argue with strangers on 4chan?
Pure projection.

>Why can't you just "accept" people have different opinions than you? Do you have control over other people's thoughts?
Huh??

>>23428723
Probably not a single novel or a play in there. And most definitely not any poetry. He's such an autistic, artless and ultimately small-souled person. He's also admitted to being a huge fan of the Mission Impossible movies lol

>>23431390
yeah some novel or play will totally change your world view.

>>23431390
Reading fiction is done for entertainment. Fiction doesn't make you a better man.

>>23431493
>reading the bible won't make you a better man

Half the time I visit /lit/ now, the entire front page is just eceleb bullshit

joseph bronski says keith woods is a philosopher wordcel and that you should read mathematics-heavy books if you really want to learn about the world

https://www.josephbronski.com/p/reading-list-for-those-interested

>>23431389
>be me
>gigarational stoic
>through sheer willpower I've trained myself to only care about what's important in life
>I've trained myself to simply accept things I have no control over
>feels good man
>anyways, time to argue with strangers on the internet over the course of several hours
>these are completely compatible, no I'm not repeatedly making idealistic assertions about how my emotions work, contradicting them through my actions, then denying any such thing took place

>>23431493
it's literally the opposite

>>23431533
>anyways, time to argue with strangers on the internet over the course of several hours
The purpose of this board is discussion. That's what this is. On /lit/ discussions often take place over days. Have you never engaged in a philosophical discussion with another human being before? The fact that you're perceiving a simple exchange of ideas as a personal attack should be profoundly embarrassing for you. But then again, you're the person who admitted your only source of anger is people saying annoying things in public to you. I'm sorry you're so soft and movable.

recommending the politics before the nichomachean ethics is peak midwit

>>23431608
>you're the person who admitted your only source of anger is people saying annoying things in public to you
Not me idk why you keep saying that
>I'm sorry you're so soft and movable.
No you're not, you're being disingenuous about your emotions again

>>23429782
>have problem
>decide it's not a problem
>have no problems

>have worry
>imagine worst case scenario
>decide it's not a problem
>have no worries
That's basic stoicism. It's a bit fucked up, but if you have anxiety over anything you're doing it wrong. A true stoic doesn't even fear death

>>23431533
>argue
Do you mean "argue" as in fight or "argue" as in discuss? Because I correct people constantly, both online and in the class room, and I feel very little to nothing about it, depending on whether or not you include the constantly growing disdain for talking to others.

>>23429855
Mike Tyson is not bulletproot. A better example is a billionaire that can pay somebody else to take bullets from him.

>>23431390
He’s primarily concerned with politics, that’s his entire schtick. To my understanding, his list (most of which is annnoyingly blocked off by paywall) is supposed to provide you with the tools to understand politics from his own lens. Why would you go out of your way to include novels and plays which aren’t relevant to the subject at hand, especially where your list is as short as 25 items?

>>23432144
Yeah, he's a third positionist and Irish Nationalist. There's a place for nationalist poetry/art, but Keith tries to help non-Irish just as much, so it wouldn't contain more than 1 or 2 peices.
The guy you're responding to is just having a knee-jerk reaction and doesn't know who Keith is. Dire, but it can't be helped.

YOU IDIOTS SOMEBODY POST THE FULL FUCKING LIST
ARE YOU ALL BRAINDEAD????

>>23429440
From what I remember the text says that a slave is he who cannot rule himself and as a result it is better for everyone to be ruled by someone else.
He talks about the idea that a slave is someone who loses a fight, that might makes right, and presents the arguments both for and against.
He also touches the fact that everyone treats Greek and foreigners differently regarding this matter.

He is very much pro slavery, just like Socrates and I'm sure he'd agree that normie cattle are natural slaves

>>23430926
Yeah

>>23432255
And rob Keith of his money? The man made a video about this a long time ago. Use your brain or get Fleeced, fagguette.

>>23432572
Just post the titles at least god fucking damn it

>>23431520
Joseph Bronski is a literal Guatemalan-Polish mutt who stole EVERYTHING from other authors (yes even the math he prides himself on)

>>23432848
he says his ancestry is just british

>>23432670
just find my bookshelf post on here. Its the Irish Traditionalist mathematician schizo one.

>>23432848
Unless you discovered some kind of novel theorem, how exactly do you "steal math" unless you're passing off it's discovery as your own?

Isn't his "quantitative sociobiology" project basically just an introductory statistics course recontextualized for 'sociobiological' study rather than pure math education?

What makes his (supposed) ancestry relevant here?

>>23432572
Tbh I don't think this kind of post is really worth paying for if you weren't already a paid substack member before.
Not really a fan of his paywalling of something like this.

83 posts and no one has leaked the list

>>23432851
>>23432984
Hello Jozef Gonzalezki. You are on Trump's list for shilling against him on Twitter and have less than a year til patriots bust down your door and march you to Gitmo.

>>23432848
yeah, first I've heard of her; just finished the article. Her recommendations seem up to par, i.e. what she steals is correct, but she seems like an insufferable dipshit. Seems to confuse solid, hard, provable, real™ science as an exact overlap of truth, which is a position other than saying science is useful and actually productive, which is what's actually the case—and what's worse, furthermore if you're not as confused as she is, then you're a low IQ wordcel such and such, which is probably true to an extent—IQ is real—but we all know that she's bringing it up because she's chronically combative because she's chronically online and baiting for attention/signalling a cultural currency, or, in other words, she reeks of tw*tter.

A few minutes have passed, and in retrospect, a lot of this article is a joke.
>Read stats 101 and you too can be on the forefront of quantitative sociobiology.
that being said I will be stealing a few of these books to read this week, firstly in the sense that i'm taking her recommendation, and secondly in the sense I'm pirating this shit as I type.

Also, kind of funny to see Pareto complain about the inscrutability of Hegel.

>>23433094
Jozef actually goes by xhe, please use xer correct pronouns

>>23433018
rightoids so cheap
no wonder they can't get a date

>>23428723
>>23429157
>>23429376
>>23429562
>>23430388
>>23431179
>>23433018
kys beggar
if you can't afford it, you're too stupid to understand the books anyway

>>23433283
The kind of smart person with a high verbal IQ that frequents here is cheap out of principle, you dirty goyim. No way am I letting you get even $10 ahead of me—my nagging mother's voice in my head won't allow it.

>>23433299
Keith hates Jews, Schlomo. Why do you care about his book list?

>>23433302
>Keith hates Jews
Wow, he and Jews have a lot in common

>>23428723
Keef is great desu

>>23428723
The actual reading list is the first 3-4 paragraphs from their Wikipedia articles. The whole article if you're feeling ambitious.

>>23433506
Based. This is all you need to do for most books.

>>23431889
A true stoic is not human but something far less.