/lit/ - Literature

>>3758585

A big persona library with many leather-bound books, in an apartment smelling of rich mahogany, gets you pussy.

That's why literature is important and necessary.

>>3758585
>There's no science in it
Keep to your science then. We need the dogs and asians to make our medicine and weapons while we live in abstraction.

>>3758595
That's what it seems like. I am genuinely interested in someone changing my opinion.

>>3758606
So pretty much you're admitting being an escapist bitch?

>>3758618

Why do you want to change your opinion? Aren't you happy just the way you are?

>>3758618
>Can't get into literature
>Throws isms around
Typical

>>3758627
I am. But I like to know what people like about certain stuff that I can't comprehend. Even more when they make me appreciate it.

>>3758618

Your perceived reality in no way shapes the reality of others. You have science, we have literature. Why its ours less "real"? Science is comprised of theory, beliefs strongly suggested but impossible to prove. How do you assume to define reality?

>>3758637
Are a le classy gent too?

Haven't you ever enjoyed someone telling you a story, or giving a lecture?

Literature is just that, only you hear it in your head because you read it

>>3758637

Why to complicate your life? If you want to understand the joy of reading, simply draw a parallel to something which causes you joy.

Think of anything which procures you pleasure. That is what some get from reading. Though, overall, my initial opinion stands: literature gets you certain type of pussy, and that is its value.

>How do I into literature, /lit/? I can't appreciate it. There's no science in it.
>How can I get into science, /sci/? I can't appreciate it. There's no literature in it.
Different sides of the same coin. Something doesn't need science in it to be good, and something doesn't need to be exceptionally written to be scientific.

I think it's a good idea to start with literature that you can relate with. So, what was the environment you grew up in? explain it and maybe we can make suggestions. In that way maybe you will see things in a new perspective, thus opening your eyes on what literature can do.

Because no form of science can shape your character so dramatically and thoroughly and build your moral compass and appreciation for humanity, life, death, love and history. None of those are science, but they're not any less valid. Comparing science with literature is just apples and oranges.

>>3758585
Read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, it's the book that pulled me out of the mindset that everyone is just a passive observer and anything that isn't science is pointless. If you want to broaden your horizons, check it out. It describes in such a logical, deductional way, from the perspective of a very scientific mind, how science comes second to experience and aesthetic is something that fundamentally precedes intellectualism.

>>3758644
Why are you throwing that skepticism bullshit at me? Are you seriously this retarded or do you want me to rage?

>>3758650
I don't know. Literature seems to me like a very personal trip. It is very difficult to empathize the feelings that a certain book gave you with someone else.

>>3758682
Literature isn't even just about entertainment or pleasure. Books can completely alter your mind and the way you behave in a way that very few pieces in other media can.

>>3758694

So can LSD.

>>3758697
Are you actually comparing the two? Literature is much more structured and precise than tripping, and it shapes your mind from a completely different angle. It doesn't look like you actually want to change your mind about literature, you just want to argue.

>this thread

>>3758682

It is a very personal trip. And the buttons it clicks vary from person to person.

I used to read furiously when I was a teen because I thought it was going to make me enlightened and more evolved than others... and because I craved the pussies who flew around that scene.

With time I realized that the dices are rolled and no matter how much you try, you pretty much can't change your destiny. But I already had developed a penchant for literature, so I kept reading but solely for pleasure. I still do. I just find it soothing, the same way others find exactly the same thrill from watching a baseball game and having some brewskies.

>>3758654
Still. How do you know a book is well written when everything ends up being personal interpretation?

>>3758665
I get what you're trying to say but at the end of the day, by reading a book you don't really learn anything new besides the facts the author throws at you. You just rearranged your thoughts in some abstract way according to what you think the symbols meant, etc.

>>3758677
Sounds interesting. Will check out. Thanks.

>>3758706

I am not OP. I am a reader. I just hate people who put our modest, equally respectable hobby on a pedestal.

>>3758706
Thats not me who replied to your comment. But I kind of address that in here>>3758716

>>3758682
Not trying to make you rage. But you misinterpret my meaning. It isn't skepticism, it is truth. I, like many, accept what science says, but nothing about it gives it more weight than any other philosophical teaching.

>>3758726
You can use science as a tool for many things. You can't use literature for anything other than entertainment/recreation.

>>3758716
>Still. How do you know a book is well written when everything ends up being personal interpretation?
Because it doesn't matter how well written a book is "objectively", because quality can only be recognized from perceiving it firsthand. The primary purpose is to convey ideas and shape the mind, even if some of it is lost in translation, not to sit back passively and acknowledge how well it's written non-subjectively.

>>3758734
Literature is an internal tool. A tool which can, and often does, drastically alter the self. This alteration in turn defines how a person utilizes external tools, such as science.

>>3758734

literature is also science, you know. Scientific papers were the most popular form of literature in the olden days (I think)

>>3758716
>Still. How do you know a book is well written when everything ends up being personal interpretation?

Personally interpret it. Do so wildly and without self-consciousness. E.g. you liked Fear and Loathing because it was a wild self-indulgent hedonistic trip, which sucked you in with the pure freedom and shit-to-the-wind libertine aspect of it all.

Subjectivity--and kinship with it--is part of a healthy soul, and if my mention of souls bothers you, then you certainly should relax a bit. Folks don't talk literally all the time, and finding what they mean can be tricky.

Nature's cool and all, and presumably if you like science, you're into knowing about it, so it seems reasonable to want to get to know some of those odd ponderings poured out of folks minds.

Though, who knows. Results may vary.

>>3758585
How do I into this thread, OP? I can't appreciate it. There is no science in it. It is all symbolism and personal interpretation. It all seems like a mirage to me. What is so good about it?


Do you see now????

>>3758762
>There is no science in it. It is all symbolism and personal interpretation.