/lit/ - Literature

Yeah but art is fun.

>>2834651
I'm a philosofag but still live my life. not everything in my life is "reading/writing shit".

Aren't both equally important to a society?

Yes.

And this thread is done.

we need both.

>Implying I give a shit about being useful to society

>>2834660

We don't need entrepreneurs and politicians.

>>2834659
They're both equally important to society? Really?
So the entrepreneur who created a business that drastically changes your life, the politician that makes sure the current system stays in place, the explorer who mapped out where you now call home, the engineer who designed your sewer system

They're equally important to a few assholes who write interesting books?
No

>>2834671
Nice utilitarian philosophy faggot.

>>2834671
Quite seriously, you're an idiot. I don't even like to use words like "idiot" lightly.

I hope you're "trolling", but if you're not, you are quite sincerely a total fucking idiot.

>>2834671
cont.
Any philosopher who is -just a philosopher, is a failure
The inability to use your philosophy in any tangible way discredits the entire thing

>>2834671

Do you really want to live without music, film, books, paintings? Are you a robot?

>>2834671

I'd rather live in a hunter-gatherer society with a thriving literary culture than a modern society with no culture at all, if either of those extremes was actually possible.

It would appear, at least for people being completely honest in their trade, that an artist or philosopher is actually much harder than some analytic trade.

That is to say, they generally have a more accepted framework formed for pragmatic purposes.

>>2834671

not OP btw

>>2834677
read:
>>2834673

you're right, OP

artists, writers, philosophers, and anyone who studies the humanities is a lesser form of human being who deserves to be treated and considered as an unintelligent, second class citizen unworthy of certain privileges and immunities

Your first mistake was asking this question, as it shows you're not cut out to be any of those things you mentioned

>>2834676
>>2834673
Unless your book or philosophy becomes a religion, it is nowhere near on par with groundbreaking physical sciences or discoveries

Denial is a funny thing

>>2834651
>>politician
>>noble

pick one.

>>2834671
So the entrepeneur who exploits the needy for their own gain, the politician that does whatever the businesses tell him to, the explorer that fucks about in a rainforest for a bit, the engineer who designed polluting 'luxury' transport

They're equally important as writers who create beautiful works of art that challenge how people think, shape the culture of generations, provide political commentary in ways that no one else can, and explore with words what it is to be human?

Hey look, I can massively warp things to suit my point too!

"Friendship is unnecessary, like philosophy, like art, like the universe itself (for God did not need to create). It has no survival value; rather it is one of those things which give value to survival."
--C. S. Lewis

Honestly, OP, your question is a lot like "why have friends and a family? Shit only ruins your chances of finding a cure for cancer. Forget that shit. Become a robot and be in a laboratory for 17 hours a day."

It's stupid, but you probably don't notice how it's stupid.

>>2834677

Imagine a philosopher who only cares about his abstract work. He makes some ground, vaguely but still present, on some new logical system which a mathematician finds and formalizes which a computer scientist implements in a new tool which some dumb shit engineer uses to create some useless item which a businessman then sells to a fucker like you who thinks the latter are objectively better.

>>2834689
>on par
Depends on which standards you apply.

>>2834651

that's just your opinion and I disagree but I will defend to the death your right to say so

>>2834691
If you really think artists or writers do such things then you are fucking retarded.

Many technological advancements were inspired by literature, art and entertainment. An engineer watching Star Trek as kid developed the cell phone for example.

There is a symbiosis between the practical and the abstract, anyone thinking otherwise is not thinking at all.

>>2834678
No, I'm saying music, film, books, etc are all the toppings of a society built with tangible sciences

>>2834687
That's clearly not what he's saying
Why is there so much butthurt in this thread?

>>2834688
Because philosophers and writers limit themselves on their introspection
Shut up

>>2834691
I'm saying they have a bigger impact on society
Also bankers control both businesses and politicians

I say this as a philosopher, people are the biggest commodity and your success can be gauged on your ability to control them. Creating a system in which they live > entertaining them for a few days or even months

Who gives a fuck?

>>2834711
>success can be gauged on your ability to control them
Feel free to change "control" to "impact"

>>2834713
Ah, the age old query.

These things mentioned as inferior were there at the beginning, even before the notion of science even existed. You technocrat imbeciles are what's wrong with the world.

>>2834724
Enjoy your smallpox and death in childbirth, philosofag.

So is being Byron less noble than being Captain Picard?

>>2834651

>politician

i lol'd.

Why not go on both paths at once?

>>2834651
Scientists operate within a system that was created by philosophers. Empiricism and positivism and the like are philosophical stances. Politicians hold the fates of nations in their hands but think in terms instilled on them by philosophers. Just take the Trias Politica for example. Or Marxism. Enterpreneurs and explorers in the same way operate within a conceptual environment formed by thinkers.

People tend to forget that the operating system they run on has mostly been formed by others. It's the philosophers who tell people what life is. Scientists figure out how it works, explorers figures out what's to it, politicians figure out how to organise the people in it and entrepreneurs figure out how to exploit them, but all of them are indebted to the philosophers, artists and writers why form their very view of the world.

And most important of all, they tell (or rather suggest) people /how/ to live their lives. Which probably is the most important of all.

>>2834711

>No, I'm saying music, film, books, etc are all the toppings of a society built with tangible sciences

Chicken and the egg, no where in history has one existed without the other (arts-sciences)

>Why is there so much butthurt in this thread?

Because it's been done a million times before and takes only a few moments of critical thought and examination of the world around you and of history to resolve

>Because philosophers and writers limit themselves on their introspection

Nothing comes solely from introspection, everything comes from experience of the exterior world

>I say this as a philosopher, people are the biggest commodity and your success can be gauged on your ability to control them. Creating a system in which they live > entertaining them for a few days or even months

You're from a profession that has revolutionized the mode of thought of all of civilized society throughout history and still don't believe that people are impacted by what they read, hear, and use to entertain themselves everyday?

>>2834651

The former care about life and are interested in it and how to express their thoughts about it.

The latter may also fall into this category. But the latter tend be materialistic consumerist whores, so in a way the latter turn their back on life and replace it with trivial shit like prestige, money, jewelry, etc.

>politicians

99% are terrible people.

OP probably hasn't realized it yet but he's exposed to as much art and culture as he's exposed to technology. It's just that the latter is more concrete and easier for a brain of his caliber to grasp.

Being an artist is hardly less challenging, than being a politician. The value is pretty much the same, but wheather you will appreciate it depends on what do you believe to bo important..... if you want to find out what you want to do, MBTI does great work in this area

Oh, look, another /sci/ vs. /lit/ thread.
It's because of shit like this that I decided to become a solicitor instead of a literature lecturer. I may enjoy literature, but I can never escape the frown of the so-called-'great' who think I'm wasting my time. Whilst these threads are, of course, borne entirely of existential crisis and insecurity, there are always those who bear the brunt of the ostensible message:

As an artist, by and large, you are not respected.

As a massive, autistic, severely traumatized bag of nerves, I couldn't live with myself knowing that someone else looks at me and thinks:

What a worthless human being
What has he done
What has he done
What has he done

I'm weak, of course. But I'll defend the integrity of the arts to the death. I'm not strong enough to martyr myself for their sake, but hopefully others will pick up where I left off.

OP is right though he words it in an offensive way. Science is more important than the arts. In the same way reality is more important than the imagination. The arts needed technological revolution to improve(i.e. the renaissance). Arts are very important in encouraging creativity in the sciences and providing entertainment however and that's why it's disgusting that people think art is less valuable than politics or business, both 'materialistic' fields that create demand for themselves. Same for fashion.

>>2834820
lol

id love to write a book but im fairly young, i think working in business/government is going to help me write a more interesting text

Great philosophers are important; any philosopher who's less than great is worthless. All artists are irrelevant; art is frivolous and we'd find something else to do for fun if it didn't exist.

But even a mediocre scientist can contribute something to the world, same with a good but not great entrepeneur or politician.

>politician
fiction writers

>entrepreneurs
unnecessary in a possible future and past non-capitalist society

>explorers
replaceable with robots and satellites

>scientists
replaceable with software (eureqa, look it up)

>good authors
impossible to replace

>>2834844
>>2834855
these

not this edgy shit >>2834805

>>2834863
>>scientists
>replaceable with software (eureqa, look it up)
>>good authors
>impossible to replace
more edgy wrong shit

>>2834855
>All artists are irrelevant; art is frivolous and we'd find something else to do for fun if it didn't exist.

>art makes millions of people happy
I suppose for you happiness is irrelevant to the human endeavour?

>>2834865

I feel like anyone who honestly believes this hasn't had any real non-trivial thought about reality.

Who. The. Fuck. Cares.

Why are you so obsessed with what other people are doing?

>>2834872
Art is nowhere near the top as far as contributors to human happiness. If anything art contributes to misery in the developed world by enabling people to stay inside alone and bored instead of talking to other people. But if that's going to be our standard, we all agree sports are more important than art and science, yes?

Any occupation that one undertakes is simply one's own way of challenging one's ego and sense of self. This manifests itself in many, many singular ways, all being highly individual. What separates "good" artists from "bad" ones is just that, the bad artist does not attempt to struggle with his identity. He thinks that producing through a medium is the same as creating art. This is not true. Challenging and attempting to progress one's self is what creates art.

If you write in order to create art, your writing will be terrible. If you write because you must write, because it is the only way you know how to live, then you will create art.

This is not for everyone. Some advance themselves through artistic creation, but it is no less worthy to live your life as a critic, teacher, or factory worker. Every form of work is just a symptom of your inner life.

>>2834887
>If anything art contributes to misery in the developed world by enabling people to stay inside alone and bored instead of talking to other people
Oh right I'm talking to a retard.

An entrepreneur has one goal: to increase his or her status. That is not the stuff of life. You're talking about diving, and this is a person who is floundering on the surface because they do not care what lies below. Add to that the fact that the majority of these people are not "idea men," but rather men skilled in business who buy the ideas and talents of others. They are essentially a breed of people who seek to have others live life so that they don't have to.

A scientist seeks simply to understand based on narrow perimeters. They understand that "life" is too broad a topic to fully realize, so they specialize and focus and their career comes down to searching for absolute facts within a narrow field. This is indeed honorable, but again in terms of diving, the scientist is carefully examining one single piece of a coral reef while the artist and the writer and floating in the middle and reeling with passion for the ocean while they rattle off great works of art.

Finally, we have the politician. I have no idea why you would include him with any of the others, because he does not belong. He is literally an entrepreneur with fewer ideas, and who sells himself as a product. He invents and creates nothing, though like the scientist he still insists on narrowing his life down to a few simple aspects to facilitate argument and election. He ignores life in order to further his career, and he refuses to contemplate questions that are anywhere near as vast as those of the philosopher. The politician is easily the least “alive” of all of them.

The writer and the artist, for these two go together, feel life itself as energy (we're assuming that they are talented here), and they feel driven to express that life energy in any way that they are capable. Perhaps they aren't "living" their lives, but they are indeed feeling or understanding their lives at a more comprehensive level, something that probably couldn't be said for most of the latter group. The philosopher, too, feels a great drive toward expressing life, but hers is to understand herself through the logic of the universe. Philosophy is not just a way of avoiding life, it is a way of knowing what life is, something that science will never tell you beyond the nauseating basics.

The latter group seems inappropriately mixed:

An explorer belongs with the philosopher, because he too feels a drive to understand and to appreciate life, but he seeks his resolution through venturing to new places and experiencing as much as possible.

>>2834901

I feel like philosophy describes the basics and science runs with it (within specific confines that is).

>>2834969

That's true, I should have mentioned that. I would say that philosophy is the root of science as well.

Is you believe art is as important as the physical sciences then you must concede that sports are too.

>>2834983

Hmmm, but what do sports create?

For the record I believe that there is artistic merit to sports.

>>2834868
the work of an author is irreplaceable. there will never be another shakespeare, another cervantes, another dante. but if einstein, or newton, or darwin didn't exist, someone else would have figured it out. a computer program has been designed that could figure out f=ma from just looking at a double pendulum for a day, and it could figure out the equations hidden within the biological functions of a cell (something human scientists have yet to figure out). we can replace science with a fucking PROGRAM, which doesn't make it trivial, just that we can automate it, and free the undoubtably large brains of scientists unlike yourself to do what they are most passionate about (perhaps an instrument, or the writing of children's novels).

>>2834997
(sorry that english is not my first language)

I was referring to those that said art's merit is derived from the happiness it brings. If this is true then sports must be placed in the same category.
What do you see as the artistic merit in sports? What is your personal definition of art?

>>2834978
>>2834969
Science is applied empiricism.

>>2835019

That's interesting, because empiricism is just a field of philosophy.

>>2835028
What are you getting at?

>>2835011
Then who says we can't create a computer program that writes literature? Aesthetics may be subjective but they aren't random; if an organic machine can do it there's no a priori to suppose a silicon one couldn't do it too.

>>2835011
we can already automate science; automatic hypothesis creator/tester programs are a real thing.

But automating art is easier; computers have been doing it for longer. Given a sample of Mozart, a computer program can generate a totally new piece that the best critics believe is a newly-discovered, forgotten song from Mozart.

>>2835011
There are already programs that paint, and quite creatively too.

more creative and aesthetically pleasing than the average grad student, though still uncompetitive with the old masters.

>>2835014

Your English is very good so far. What is your mother tongue?

I believe that art is interpretation of self and of life. You feel something and then you create something that, to you, corresponds to it. I believe it is a bunch of tiny monuments to humanity and human feelings. I believe that art is evidence of the soul and of the self.

Now as for sports, I believe that in the same way that some art is painted on a temporary canvas, such as graffiti that is going to be removed some day, then one could see the coordination, the organized human interaction, and the powerful emotion and feeling of sport as a painting planted on the canvas of a pitch or field. However, I don't believe that this can be intentional with most athletes, as it is more of a subconscious work of art. Because it relies so heavily on the collective of players on both sides, and because it depends neither on victory nor defeat, the artistic merit will always be invisible to the players involved, and indeed even to less artistic onlookers.

You can neither automate science nor art. Both are uniquely human, and the conditionals that scientific discovery stems from must be formed by humans, and not by computers. Any art found in automated painting is entirely interpretive, and thus the "art" is more in the process and the observer than in the work itself. Thus, art cannot be automated.

>>2835054

Then art can never be "made" in a certain sense of the word.

scientist and explorer maybe. but just fuck off with entrepeneurship and politicians m8. stop being such a nihilist.

>>2835058

That's a good point. I suppose "translated" might be better. Translated from feeling by the artist, and then back into feeling by the observer?

>>2835059
wait, you're not even a nihilist, you're even less of an intellectual than that.

>>2835061

But if computer art can still have a translational process, to what usefulness was the artists original intent?

>>2835054

I wouldn't say they're uniquely HUMAN, per se. If we're ever able to create sufficient AI with similar thought processes to our own, they'd easily succeed at it as well as us. It's machines that aren't capable of abstract non-linear thought that are the problem.

Death of the author, /lit/. If a computer wrote all the words in Blood Meridian it would still be just as good.

>>2835067

machines can generate non-linear processes all day long, buddy.

>>2835065

"Usefulness" is a word that means literally nothing out of context. One program is not more useful than another, no more than one tool is more usable than another, when taken out of context.

Usefulness for what?

>>2835075

Well, what is the point of the artist's intent if a translation art process can exist from a source with no intent?

>>2835054
In practice, humans are a bundle of neural nets with imperfect communication between layers. That is what makes them hard to simulate easily.

However, humans are computers by definition; since humans can execute Turing computation, and since any Turing machine can be computed by another Turing machine of n+1 size.

>>2835071

Through the use of linear processes, yes. Then you're just in meta-linear territory.

>>2835076

Art is defined as being a product of human skill and imagination. A machine generating art all day is a work of art in itself, and the artworks it produces come from the machine's creator.

>>2834794

I think I'm starting to notcie when you post and I like it.

>>2835077

I suppose we must be machines. We still have no idea what gives us the "self," which is what art stems from, so really that argument is pointless in this context.

>>2835084

What if a creator made a machine who could create something that did not explicitly coincide with the machine's creators intent

>>2835052
I lived in a Spanish speaking country for the first 14 years of my life.
I'm not incredibly well read and am not completely sure of the meaning of "self" in a philosophical sense as I suppose you are using it. But I believe art can exist even if all that we are is a the result of neurons firing randomly. (an existentialist line of thought perhaps?)
As for sports I enjoy them greatly and it is good to hear someone speak in there defense as an artistic medium, If only vaguely.

>>2835093
The reflection between the twin mirrors of the self-model generating potential realities, plus the incomplete transmission of the senses testing them and corpus acting on them is the present cool people theory.

It happens to be the only one backed up by MRI analysis, but there's hardly enough evidence to say for sure just yet.

>>2835091
Please share your theories, I'm intrigued. I'm curious as to my identity while being anonymous.

>>2835105

Then wouldn't that just be a part of the work of art that is the machine and by extension its creations?

>>2835119

Oh I don't understand "self." I know we're neurons and whatnot, but until we understand precisely what makes each man unique, I'm sticking to my pseudo-spiritual "self," the way I like it.

And I see art in everything, almost as a curse, because no one ever wants to talk about how something apparently inartistic is really a work of art. Either way though, sports are an important part of a well-rounded human being. A venting of emotion, an expression of drive and passion. Physical poetry!

>>2835149

I suppose, by "definition", but I can think of a way where the artist's intention are almost completely opposite of a sample set of what a machine could produce and the "translator" can perceive something entirely different than intended.

>>2835156

Which is both the downfall and the beauty of art, and which is in itself a fantastically artistic concept. Misunderstanding and misinterpret on an enormous and profound scale.

>>2835159

Well yes, but then it seems apparent that a creator with intention is not necessarily needed

>>2835164

Not until you tell the observer that the piece of art they're looking at was randomly generated. Then it's not art anymore to them, so it's a very subjective problem.

Although you know everything is pointless and meaningless, even science and mathematics, when reduced to such an existential point.

>>2835175
The observer can probably tell if they engage with the art.

>>2835175
>Not until you tell the observer that the piece of art they're looking at was randomly generated.

Well, if he never is told it is never known


>Although you know everything is pointless and meaningless

Im not so certain about this.

I gotta run in 5-10 min, i'll be back tonight if its still raging on.

>>2835180
>>2835181

Well here's my theory:

The whole experience of the machine making art and the misunderstanding of art and the revealing of the machine's responsibility for the art is all just one big piece of experiential art, planned as it was by the machine's designer and the exhibit's organizer.

>being anything less than an athlete, soldier, criminal

>>2835203

Many soldiers are all three at once!

>>2835209

Any soldier who hasn't done time in the stockade should not to be trusted.

I'm the "utilitarian faggot" from earlier in the thread who was the only one agreeing with OP

Every thought must have the ability to have a corresponding action/result, or else it is irrelevant. This action must work in tandem with logic, or else it is stupidity

99.9% of art does nothing *real* other than entertaining people. While this can make you money, a result in tandem with logic, it's of second hand importance

These philosophers have an theory, and they gain fame and money (willpower) from teaching this theory...but they don't acquire willpower from *using* this theory
In this way, artists and musicians are inherently stuck in a lower tier than philosophers, who are almost always below the hard sciences

If you need to use your art (theory, music, paintings) to inspire people to cause action rather than use your art (only theories can be used for this) to directly cause action, then it is not very relevant in the scheme of things

>>2835203

You sounds like the worst kind of weaboo edgy faggot teenager

>>2835279

what the fuck
that's not what willpower means in the slightest

>>2835279
fuck u pussy faggot pseudointellectual hipster weaboo tryhard aspie fucker

>less noble, less challenging

OP is a genius

>>2835279

most art challenges and addresses various social issues. bad or meaningless art generally does so superficially or hamfistedly. it opens people's minds up to new ideas in ways that philosophical ramblings rarely manage. if humans were purely rational beings, explaining sociological & philosophical concepts through dry text would be the best & most efficient method, but since we're not, the arts often do a much better job of it.

>>2835285
I really hate to argue within contexts of dictionary definitions, but
>Self-control: the trait of resolutely controlling your own behavior
Money allows you to do more of what you want to do
People inherently have willpower, if you get a lot of people worshiping you, this conforms at least some of their willpower into yours
There's a reason famous people can do more just by being famous
Imagine if you were literally worshiped

>>2835292
I'll take it you meant to say "realist"

>>2835306
So at best it's a critique used to inspire?
>if you need to use your art to inspire people to cause action rather than use your art to directly cause action, then it is not very relevant in the scheme of things

>>2835198

Well I can think of a situation where one artist can make a machine which generates art that, if the artist is honest a given a sample, the observer could not reach the conclusion the artist had intended.

>>2835279
>implying there's a scheme of things
>presupposing the importance of the welfare of humanity as a whole

More spooks in here than an Alabama cotton farm.

>>2835307

people with more power don't inherently have more willpower; they NEED more willpower in order to be efficient or good at what they do, but many of them don't have enough of it, and thus begin to fail. just look at all the pop stars who ruin their careers through drugs & partying & irresponsibility

>>2835311

why is it not very relevant? inspiring 100 people to blow themselves up is a lot more effective than simply blowing yourself up.

>>2835315
Way to attack an incidental part of my post
"Scheme" in the way I'm using it, is a byproduct. Don't read anymore into it than that
Art hasn't really done much

Are you a human? Yes
Then these these hard sciences did much more to give bring you to your current state than any form of art
Pay no mind to the fact that you would hardly know of any are if it weren't for technology
Pay no mind to the fact that, if you're trying to be a nihilist, humans have been the biggest variable on this earth in the past 300 years. We are, by default, the gods of the earth and are (relatively) fast gaining in omnipotence

>>2835279
You sound much less smart than me

>>2835321
Art has never inspired an action that big
Political propaganda and brainwashing on the other hand has done that many times over

>>2835329
I kind of chuckled when I read that
Don't you have some anime to watch or something

>>2835335
>Art
>Political propaganda

>implying they're mutually exclusive
learn to art history plz

>>2835279

There is no such thing as "irrelevant" out of context, especially not when it comes to the brain. You're being incredibly presumptuous there. You have absolutely no idea how our brains work. The only thing that is relevant is having kids and eating and sleeping and disposing of waste, nothing more. Ergo, all science is pointless bullshit. That is how your argument works.

>>2835313

But isn't that part of the whole art show? It's meta-art.

>>2835327

There is neither society nor culture without art. Science is how we live. Art is why we live, for without it, as far as we are concerned, there is nothing. You would kill yourself if not for art. That is my argument.

>>2835340
Don't chuckle, just don't respond. I'm in the middle of something, you're not as smart as me, I'm not interested in explaining why soldiers, athletes and criminals are more valuable than scientists and artists, get over it.

>>2835335

Propaganda and even politics itself is art. If politics wasn't art, we would just be ruled by the decisions of computers, or by whoever was smartest, or by whoever was strongest. We have, however, through long and arduous study of philosophers and writers and artists, constructed a social system that you know of as politics.

Many countries have constitutions, and those are absolutely art, written beautifully and influenced by artistic writers. My own country's constitution (USA) is certainly better as a piece of art than as a reliable reference document for modern events.

Law is an art. The structure of a government, and the rules by which it operates, are artistic creations. Art isn't always hipsters in scarves drinking tea and coffee and smoking cigarettes.

>>2835335

are you seriously saying art has never been used as political propaganda? what's this then, a turd on a stick?

>Every thought must have the ability to have a corresponding action/result, or else it is irrelevant. This action must work in tandem with logic, or else it is stupidity
This is retarded

>99.9% of art does nothing *real* other than entertaining people. While this can make you money, a result in tandem with logic, it's of second hand importance
This is retarded

>
These philosophers have an theory, and they gain fame and money (willpower) from teaching this theory...but they don't acquire willpower from *using* this theory
In this way, artists and musicians are inherently stuck in a lower tier than philosophers, who are almost always below the hard sciences
This is retarded

>If you need to use your art (theory, music, paintings) to inspire people to cause action rather than use your art (only theories can be used for this) to directly cause action, then it is not very relevant in the scheme of things

You would literally have to pay people like me, at this stage of my education and where I am at right now in my life, even to entertain the notion of responding seriously to this tripe, let alone explaining why it is gibberish. This goes for pretty much all of my posts on /lit/ right now.

>scientist
>living life

pick one

>HURRRR SCIENCE
There is a place for people like you.
>>>/reddit/
Someone who exalts science and demonises the arts probably isn't fit to indulge in either. Also, your argument makes no sense, I don't "know what you mean", you fucking idiot; how would I know what you mean if you make such a bold assertion and only provide a meaningless comparison, followed by such a vapid statement such as "Do you know what I mean"?

>Isn't being an artist, a philosopher, a writer less noble, less challenging path in life than being a scientist, explorer, entrepreneur, politician.
>Isn't being a philosopher, a writer less noble, less challenging path in life than being an explorer (Explore what, fool? The world has already been mapped) entrepreneur, politician.
>Isn't being an artist, a philosopher, a writer less noble, less challenging path in life than being an entrepreneur, politician.
Well, it is time to leave this thread. I hope OP commits suicide.

>>2835342
Do you honestly think I meant art?
Propaganda
Practical theories thought up in a government think tank and put to action

>>2835349
You also sound gay, which isn't very uncommon with weaboos
Are you masturbating to ladyboys over there? Or have you graduated to actual guys

>>2835346
Art is a byproduct of the freedom technology gives us, nothing more
Art flourishes in and because of technologically advanced societies
When people are given freedom and time, art is the result

And, what? I'm not speaking of the brain
Societies are defined by what system it lives under and the resulting technological advancement that comes thereof

In the gears of society art is at the top: the most noticeable and fastest moving, but also the most irrelevant

>>2835375
Don't chuckle, just don't respond. I'm in the middle of something, you're not as smart as me, I'm not interested in explaining why soldiers, athletes and criminals are more valuable than scientists and artists, get over it.

>>2835375

>but also the most irrelevant

how so?

>>2835375

Why are you on an arts board if you don't understand or appreciate art? Go to /sci., they like your line of thinking.

>>2835359
>thinking this was made by artists
Look up PSYOPS

>>2835358
While I agree, I'm definitely not getting into this

>>2835361
>at this stage in my education and where I am at with my life
You're a 20 something weaboo faggot who (inherently by being a weaboo faggot) never fully grew up
I'm curious, are you black?

I've noticed blacks on the internet are so keen to get away from black culture that they fall into the gayest little sub cultures

>>2835378
Just don't respond d'averc, you're letting him get to you

>>2835391
I'm a philosopher
I hate saying that tbh

To me, being a philosopher only means I'm in the infancy of my growth
I'd like to do something with my theories beyond getting paid to tell them to others

>>2835396
Don't chuckle, just don't respond. I'm in the middle of something, you're not as smart as me, I'm not interested in explaining why soldiers, athletes and criminals are more valuable than scientists and artists, get over it.

>>2835391
I'd also like to write books and maybe even lolmake a cult b movie

I'm just being realistic

>>2834709
So, 1984 isn't political commentary, Jack Kerouac had no effect on counterculture, and both philosophy and avant-garde are nonexistent?

Good to hear.

>>2835402
Don't smart, don't soldier. I'm in the middle of chuckling you're not as interesting as me, I'm no going to respond about why scientists and artists are more something than athletes and criminals, get interested.

>>2835410
Don't chuckle, just don't respond. I'm in the middle of something, you're not as smart as me, I'm not interested in explaining why soldiers, athletes and criminals are more valuable than scientists and artists, get over it.

>>2834697
Philosophers don't create logical systems, that's the job of specialists in information theory, logicians or mathematicians.

Sage because this is a troll post, even though I'm playing the devil's advocate here.

>>2835396
>>thinking this was made by artists
>Look up PSYOPS

Can a PSYOP not also be an artist?

looks like syracuse?

>>2835391

really? from what i've seen even /sci/ isn't this retarded for the most part

>>2835413
Don't smuckle, don't smolder. I'm in the middle of duckling, you're not as interesting as me, I'm not gonna despond about why scientists and artists are more somewhere than athletes and criminals, get pinterested.

>>2835431
Don't chuckle, just don't respond. I'm in the middle of something, you're not as smart as me, I'm not interested in explaining why soldiers, athletes and criminals are more valuable than scientists and artists, get over it.

>>2835432
Don't shuckle, don't shoulder. I'm in the middle of muckling, you're not as interesting as me, I'm not gonna Le Monde about why Ryazanists and dart fists are more somewhere than athletes and criminals, get splinterested.

Don't chuckle, just don't respond. I'm in the middle of something, you're not as smart as me, I'm not interested in explaining why soldiers, athletes and criminals are more valuable than scientists and artists, get over it.

also fuck off wildweasel

Boat suckle, must coat respawn. Dime sin tongue riddle luv nothing, tour cot pass tart jazz flea, mime sot midrifted pen complaining sky brassieres, completes sand seminals par Moore malleable tan scientologists and fartists, pit mower sit.

No u

1

i liked where this thread was going before it degenerated into copypasta. regenerate it plase.

Most of the good ones from each category were both.

>>2835453
Get out of here, Joyce.

>>2835878

my dad was obsessed with finnegan's wake. he's dead now. i should reeread it for his sake.

>>2835891
well duh if finnegan had a wake then obviously he was dead because you wouldn't hold a wake otherwise

>>2835898

i am actually alughing a lot but i'm really drunk at this point so maybe it doesn't count

Marcus Aurelius is the embodiment of the two meeting. He is a gifted, well spoken and thoughtful philosopher, warrior-king, and badass. Be like him.

>>2837349
>being an emperor instead of a bum

Pleb tier