/lit/ - Literature

Good stuff, but I prefer Fear and Trembling.

fucking nerd

>Man is spirit. But what is spirit? Spirit is the self.
One poor definition was bad but two in a row and I had to quit reading right there.

Better than what I read of Sartre, will give it a shot.

It is great but he is neurotic as hell

>>2931309
I wish the philosophy majors would leave.

>>2931335
I'm not a philosophy major, I'm a dilettante STEM major.

>>2931335
>implying philosophy majors

these are all lit and english majors who have read 2-4 major works of modern philosophy and a handful of literary existentialist works

there are a few continentals on /lit/ and a few analytics but the analytics tend to stay on /sci/ where their math lite major belongs and the continentals tend to get ignored because continental philosophy is one giant nothing

>The self is a relation which relates itself to its own self, or it is that in the relation [which accounts for it] that the relation relates itself to its own self; the self is not the relation but [consists in the fact] that the relation relates itself to its own self.

u wot m8?

I guarantee that nobody on /lit/ can break this down into simpler terms.

>>2931343
identity is recursive with no coincidence

>>2931343
Imagine a pointer in a computer program pointing to itself.

>>2931350
And replace pointer with the fact that the pointer is pointing to the pointer and make the pointer the fact.

>>2931343
It's dodging around the word recursion.

The "self" is self-reference in itself; recursive.

The mind is an algorithm. Deal with it.

u wot m8

This is the kind of shit I think about whilst on high doses of amphetamines, and when they wear off I just figure it's a bunch of nonsense and can't remember it anyways.

ITT:

No-one realises the quoted passage is a parody of Hegel/Hegelian philosophers in general and is meant to be taken tongue-in-cheek.

Kierkegaard is so far ahead of you guys.

>>2931343
The quote makes a lot more sense in the context, he explains his terms. He is talking about sentience. We only see someone as possessing a self when they can look inwardly on themselves, that is what it means to be a person. Kierkegaard is trying to figure out what the noun "Self" refers to in this case, as it appears to only be an inward reflection onto itself. As you can plainly see, this is confusing whatever way you want to spin it. The passage is obtuse on purpose, it is in character.

I think I'll go back to porn.

>>2931339

I'm an analytical philosophy guy. But I almost never talk philosophy here. I just end up getting frustrated.

It's not that impenetrable guys. Self is a reference that references itself. Self can't be defined without calling a reference to it"self". It's turtles all the way down.

>>2931339
>>2931437

Actually that post has a good example of the kind of things that make me frustrated:
>math lite major
Right.

>>2931442
Don't bring that hurr durr liberal arts vs science faggotry into here. We are trying to have a thread about philosophy.

>>2931477

I'm saying that philosophy is not "math lite", it's a different subject altogether. In other words I'm doing precisely the OPPOSITE of your hurr durr liberal arts vs science faggotry, you fucking imbecile.

>>2931577
Sorry, I just picked one random part of the discussion. My point being, that every good attempt at discussion ends up detailed by faggots trying to discuss what philosophy is/who had the better university degree.

As it happens the thread seems to be dying anyway, as no-one here seems to be able to comment on Kierkegaard.

My comment on Kierkegaard :
Kierkegaard thought that he was a great seducer because he, the rich kid, was able to bang lower social class girls.
I don't know much about his philosophy, but it doesn't seem to have had a real political impact. And criticizing christianity was already the norm back in Kierkegaard's time.

>The self is a relation which relates itself to its own self, or it is that in the relation [which accounts for it] that the relation relates itself to its own self; the self is not the relation but [consists in the fact] that the relation relates itself to its own self.
says the same thing three times

>whenman is regarded as soul.
deluded Christian bullshit

>If on the contrary the relation relates itself to its own self, the relation is then the positive third term, and this is the self.
implying this is the self
implying there is a self

>that aspie prose
>blatantly lying

Stay rat-tier kierkegaard

>>2931426
>No-one realises the quoted passage is a parody of Hegel/Hegelian philosophers in general and is meant to be taken tongue-in-cheek.

>>2931863
>implying kierkegaard could irony
>implying he isn't as rat-tier as hegel

>>2931878
Nice use of kierkegaardian irony right there.

Kirkegaard was #1 troll.

>Continental philosophy

>>2931881
>Christian rationalization for Kierkegaard's shitty philosophy

nice try

>>2931822
You should give him a read. Kierkegaard is not a critic of Christianity, far from it, he is a writer who is attempting to defend Christianity from the contemporary trendy, reductive versions of it, and from the onward march of the Enlightenment. See Kierkegaard as the last great Christian thinker, acutely aware he is on the cusp of history, of everything sacred to him about to be blown away by modernism. There is an intense romanticism to Kierkegaard, and, of course, tragedy. He saw Modernism coming a century early, and in doing that, set the tone for post-modernism before modernism had even happened.

>>2931878
I assume you are trolling on purpose to keep the thread going? If so, thanks.

The problem with Kierkegaard is actually the opppesite. He was incapable of saying ANYTHING without being deeply ironic, either that or (lol), so overblown in being unironic he was ironic again. He must have been a complete dick to be around.

>>2932007
He sounds like most of my hipster ex-friends.

>>2932048
Kierkegaard was the first hipster. He invented existentialism.

He lived in constant unhappiness because he could not marry the love of his life. She wanted to marry him, and he wanted to marry her, but he knew his spirit was so melancholy he would ruin her, so he prevented himself from marrying her.

He wrote most of his with anonymously, as much of it was highly controversial, and was written under different pseudonyms, each with their own personality. Kierkegaard used to turn up at the beginning and end of the Opera, so that people could see him in the box and assumed he had a social life, when really all he did was stay at home and read/write.

>>2932065
He was probably right. I've left/ruined a lot of relationships where, had I stayed/not ruined them, the result would have been the complete demoralisation of my partner, complete 'stunting' of her spiritual growth and freezing her in time at the moment I met her, rather than letting her face life's trials on her own without being shielded by a man.

>>2932079
Like I said, Kierkegaard invented hipsterdom/angst. Angst literally wasn't a think until he started writing about it.

>>2932065
That's pretty cool. One of my profs kept mentioning that Kierkegaard was likely an autist and super difficult to live with.

I'm not exactly sure how to interpret this opening. Is Kierkegaard parodying Hegel by writing in his style, while at the same time actually doing philosophy that goes against Hegel?

>>2932086
Pretty much. With Nietzsche a little later too.

>>2932270
Yes. It is written under Kierkegaard's pseudonym Anti-Climacus (he had fucking loads). Anti-Climacus is a kind of old Hegelian/christian theologian as far as I can remember. Kierkegaard isn't just making fun of Hegalians though, he is using that terminology and that way of thinking for a serious end, only doing it sort of tongue in cheek. Basically, he's solving a philosophical problem through a fictional character, who would totally write like that, even though Kierkegaard himself wouldn't (though on some level probably would enjoy doing so).

>>2932079
wait are you joking? do you honestly think you ruined girls for life because you no longer have sex with them?

>>2931426
It best be. I only come to /lit/ every so often, and almost every time I visit there happens to be some philosophy thread filled with people who think they understand the secrets of the universe. I started thinking /lit/ was filled with a bunch of pretentious college kids spouting out excerpts from their lecture from earlier that day. Please tell me I was wrong.

>>2932396
Actually he was saying the opposite. That if he had stayed with the girl, he would have ruined her life. So angsty. Søren would be proud.

>>2932407
Its a very famous passage, that is written in character as a sort of idealised Hegelian Christian theologian. It actually makes sense, if you turn off your snark. People like to quote it a lot because it looks like nonsense on the face of it. It is most likely meant to be a bit silly, or at least a bit inhuman.

>>2932412
Alrighty then. And my snark was only half-sincere, /lit/ is one of the most civil boards I frequent, I would never hate it.

>>2931309

>>2932086
What's angst? I never identify anything in reality and say 'that is angst.' I see sad people, mad people, bad people, but angsty people? I don't know who they are. Are they - just - anxious?

>>2932461
Teenage nihilistic anxiety, yeah. It is a modern condition, often understood to come hand in hand with the City, and modernity in general.

>>2932461
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Concept_of_Anxiety
>For Kierkegaard (writing as a pseudonymous author, Vigilius Haufniensis), anxiety/dread/angst is unfocused fear. Kierkegaard uses the example of a man standing on the edge of a tall building or cliff. When the man looks over the edge, he experiences a focused fear of falling, but at the same time, the man feels a terrifying impulse to throw himself intentionally off the edge. That experience is anxiety or dread because of our complete freedom to choose to either throw oneself off or to stay put. The mere fact that one has the possibility and freedom to do something, even the most terrifying of possibilities, triggers immense feelings of dread. Kierkegaard called this our "dizziness of freedom."

>>2933110

No, it's coincident with the human condition. Angst is what caused Adam and Eve to eat of the tree of knowledge, according to Kierkegaard.

Teenage angst is but a manifestation of this greater concept. It is really the realization that what is valuable to society--to parents, teachers and other authority figures--need not be valuable to the individual. In this a youth realizes his true freedom as a human being and has the opportunity to create himself as something other than a cliche of society. Unfortunately, for lack of cultivation and personal strength, one tends to eventually fall back into the grip of societal conventions. This falling-back is mistaken for maturity.

Heidegger addresses this cycle caused by angst more closely, but I need to review my notes of his book before I can say more.

>>2933181
I was trying to help a layman understand the term. Arguably teenage angst is the purest form of the condition, it is only once we become adults that we figure out a way to deal with the anxiety (or else go mad).

>>2933190

yeah, sure

>visit denmark
>street called Kierkegade
>"gade" is more or less "street"
>Danish puns

>>2933227
Gaard just the same word as "yard" (as you can see). Kierkegaard's name is Churchyard, as in, Graveyard. Yeah, he really is that existentialist. Even his name is depressing.

>>2933190
The poster above you would probably say that we deal with angst by fulfilling society's expectations, which seems like the 'dealing with angst' is simply a form of submission to the status quo, ERGO: angst - heroic potential, dread of heroic role, achilles syndrome(?), non-angst or angst-liberated is no emancipation but total enslavement, submission to society, herd/slave mentality.

How did kirky come to the conclusion that man is actually "spirit" or does he just assume we have to take his knowledge as gospel. Man is a bunch of syanpses and neurons acting in a certain way that has nothing to do with "spirit"
Itt: fucking faggot philosopher who never answered anything and just made more questions for himself and a bunch of edgy faggots who pretend to understand him.

>>2934430
..I don't even know where to begin with you. Here is a start.

Is there such a thing (be it an event, a state, whatever) as happiness, as being happy? Is this a phenomenon you recognise? I would hope it is. However, at the same time this state, or event is identical to some physical event or other involving the firing of neurons and so on. You can give a physical description of what is going on in terms of a movement of atoms, and so on, OR you can give an account that talks in term of an emotion happening to a person. They are two routes not necessarily solvable to one another.

Now, in the sense of meaning, there is such a thing as a "spirit". The corresponding physical description would be something to do with a particular sophisticated brain operating at such a level that, under another analysis, we could call it self-concious.

Do you follow?