/lit/ - Literature

you have to be smart. smart people can usually respect STEM, even if they aren't that skilled at it

But are all the best writers really scientists historically?

Objective scrutiny.

>>4659946

I can think of a few

>>4659959
start namin them

im curious

It's all a matter of opinion.
I don't think any of my favourite writers had scientific backgrounds.
I don't really like Dostoyevsky.

>>4659959
garbage

first and foremost Dostoevsky was a Christian, just like the majority of the greats.

>>4659967
Chekhov was a doctor.

There's a whole list here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physician_writer

>>4659934
>all the best writers
You obviously don't know much writers

Because the two fields used to not be so antagonistic

Kurt Vonnegut
Conan Doyle
Primo Levi
Boris Vian
Isaac Asimov
J. G. Ballard

Philip K. Dick dropped uni.
Gunter Grass did the Hitlerian Youths and a SS Panzerdivision. Hue.
DFW flirted with pure mathematics.

Franzen studied german, Rowling French and Harper Lee law.

>>4660063
the best writers are either doctors or had parents who were doctors

>>4660091
Are you saying that these are the best writers or are you just naming some STEMfag writers you know?

>>4659967
Musil

>>4660063
to name a few more Russians

Solzhenitsyn
Platonov
Bulgakov

Philosophers invented STEM.

>>4660103
those are stem. Don't know why OP wants them to be better.

Vian is my favorite of the bunch though.

St exupery was a pilot.

What a fucking life. Pilot/writer. Must have drowned in pussy

>>4660146
>philosophers invented STEM
>people who wanted to know how the world works invented STEM

cuz writing isn't lucrative, gotta get a real job.
writers with jobs involved in writing and academic posts for award winning writers with english masters are relatively new inventions.

>>4659934
Hi Thom Yorke

>be 25 year old neet
>decide it’s time to make a change
> search for job based on personality

"The INFP will be happiest in careers which allow them to live their daily lives in accordance with their values, and which work towards the greater good of humanity. It's worth mentioning that nearly all of the truly great writers in the world have been INFPs."


feels good man

>>4659934
Their autistic fantasies can produce some very creative work.

>>4660530
>Jung

dont listen to that stuff plsplsplsplsplsplspls

>>4660530
infp bro

>>4660530
>myers briggs
You are so fucking dull

>>4660530
Myers Briggs tests are horoscopes for people who think their smarter than the people that do horoscopes

Instead shrugging and being themselves, they try to figure out what makes great writing great. They're good at this because they're used to breaking down difficult questions into simpler ones.

>>4659934
What is petitio principii?

Problem solving ability as opposed to appropriation and regurgitation. Mathematics is logic. I think to sum up, that quote that the guy said, "some people make things happen, some people watch what happens, some people wonder what happens", i.e. STEM, Arts/NEET (some), NEET.

>>4661532
If you're not NEET you're a pleb

>william carlos williams was a doctor his whole life

>>4660044
Everyone was a Christian back then; what are you trying to say?

>>4660530
Want to know another fact? The vast majority of INFP's never did anything special, just like nearly everyone who has ever lived. You're a 25 year old NEET, not a 'truly great writer'. Becoming a great writer involves a lot of hard work and genius, so good luck on that!

>>4662511
That art and philosophy can only truly be appreciated by a deeply religious people.

>>4662511

Don't bother talking to him. He's probably that guy who thinks you can only be an artist if you're Christian.

>>4662511
It is worth pointing out, though, that there are Christians and there are CHRISTIANS, and Dostoevsky was undoubtedly the latter.

To be honest, there aren't really any good writers bar a very, very few. Homer is the monarch of the entire "Western Canon" and yet Plato thought he was quite awful, and Plato was quite right in some respects. Dostoevsky is trash, not worth reading at all. The only characteristic that all of the 'classics' share is that they are all succint expressions of the cultural prejudices of their people and their time. Most works are only worth reading for the sake of historical curiosity. As far as beauty in language is concerned, you'd be better off memorizing the lines of Homer or Virgil than trudging your way through the myriad ages. As far as moral lessons and wise proverbs and profound observations are concerned, Solomon was right to say that there is nothing new under the sun, and coincidentally The Bible is undoubtedly the best place to look for a combination of the three I mentioned, and you'd be better off learning biblical lines than trudging through the ages only to hear poets repeat the same thing in different languages.
The fact is that you can only read so many books In your life, and you can only remember and commit to heart little of what you read, so to read anything other than the absolute best of the best books available is sheer folly. Another truth is that those who do trudge through the western canon almost always become obnoxious know-it-all pedants, to the extent that they would have been better off not reading at all and applying themselves to more humble and edifying pursuits.

>>4662584
Oh, and Shakespeare is crap :)
I'm an Englishman so there is no envy.

>>4662584
Oh one more thing. I remember a writer using the term "paragraph gobbler" to deride those pedants who read for the sake of reading.

Consider that epithet well. Are you a paragraph gobbler?

If you don't reflect on what you read and seek to better yourself thereby then you are assuredly a paragraph gobbler.

>>4662584
Ok, one last thing. I will truly refrain from further addition but for this final comment.

There is a verse in one of the gospels where the Virgin Mary is said to have learned some proverbs by heart and became wise. I also recently read of an illiterate begger who learned to be a wise, content, virtuous man by having lines from wise books quoted to him.

The point is that you really, really do not need to read that much. People read too often for mere idle pleasure and not for serious reflection. There are certain lines in The Bible that if you took them to heart, just a single one of said lines even, you could become a great Saint.

That's how little reading you actually NEED to do. The rest is vanity, reading for vanity.

>>4660530
Of all the mbti personality types, INFPs have the lowest average income.

>>4661311
No, I just happen to know I'm smarter than someone who doesn't understand the difference between "their" and "they're".

>>4662623

but everything is vanity, Biblebro; 'tis why Jehovah gave us Ecclesiastes -- the better to justify suicide.

STEM majors are known for being awful writers.

>>4659959
He certainly wasn't a dentist.
Clever, I know, thanks.
Seriously, though, those teeth? You could skin a potatoes off those incisors.

>>4662528

>came to /lit/ having never read joyce