/lit/ - Literature

I can already tell your book is shite from a few pixels and seeing quite a few shitty "philosophers" on 4chan in my time

There's a reason the words young and philosopher don't go together.
There's also a very good and fair reason that "academic stuff" is where philosophy is and shall remain.

>>5103478
>I've written my book
post link please, so I can have some ground to call you a hack

>>5103478
>Is anybody young even writing philosophy these days?
Students and phds, perhaps even a few professors, depending on what you consider to be you.

>>5103502

>academics
>good at philosophy

>>5103509
oh, I'm sorry. You haven't actually read any philosophy yet, I didn't realize.

>>5103532

>posting on /lit/ when he should be grinding away on his thesis no one will ever, EVER, read

>>5103570
Nah, I handed it in last month.

>>5103570
>Tfw a 200 word thesis due tomorrow morning and I've not even started

I want to die why is life so shit fuck

>>5103602
That's literally an opening paragraph and maybe one more paragraph's worth of writing. Three if you're really concise. You could probably crank it out in 10 minutes tops.

>>5103478
... I'm going to nibble this bitch.

Who do you, OP, consider to be philosophers? That is, if philosophers aren't allowed to "just [do] academic stuff."

>>5103478
The only people that write and publish philosophy books are tenured academics. If your ideas aren't publishable in an academic journal, they're probably not worth anyone's time, unless you can market it as some sort of self-help book I suppose.

do you have a philosophy phd op? no? then why the fuck would anyone take your amateur ramblings seriously? fuck off faggot

>>5103622
>

>>5103622
>being this new

>>5103632
Actually 200 words is indeed nothing, it's less than half a page A4 12 pnt lettering

>>5103509
>'writes philosophy'
>'is good at philosophy'
>synonymous

>>5103478
What have you written about? Like, you seem to think it would fit in with Penguin more than with a philosophy publisher, which makes me wonder if it's philosophy proper or like a novel with metaphysical themes or something. Can we see a sample?

>>5103659
it's because he sees classic greek and european philosophy published by penguin classics and therefor thinks his shit should also be published by them aka he's a moron with no grip on reality

>>5103478
>young authors of philosophy

The young never write anything worth reading, especially in philosophy.

>>5103711

Eragon was good for a nice young adult fantasy read.

>>5103628
exactly, but tenure and tenure-track professors both

>>5103663
Jaden Smith?

alright everybody, thank you for all of the good responses.

>>5103487
>I can already tell your book is shite from a few pixels

I agree, but I believe that the saying goes "...from some of the pixels", not "a few pixels".

>>5103495
>There's a reason the words young and philosopher don't go together.

what's that?

>that "academic stuff" is where philosophy is and shall remain.

OK, since quite a few anons have responded to my mention of academic philosophy, here's a remark about that:

All I meant in my first post is that most contemporary philosophy books I see published are written by academics. The difference between what I've written and what they've written is that I do not make mention of the history of philosophy, nor do I critique particular works of philosophy.

Now, some of you have decided to read a bit further into my mention of academic philosophy, and have already begun defending it. That's all good and well, but I did not intend offense against your study.

>>5103497
sure thing. I've posted it here before. some lurkers have called and written me. let me know what you think of it.

http://www.humanactionnetwork.com/ethix-.html

>>5103502
>depending on what you consider to be you

I...

no, just kidding, I caught your meaning. well, I'm not a PhD, and back in college I did meet some good professors who wrote and published philosophy. their work was the sort of thing I mentioned before-- analysis of the history of philosophy, critique of contemporary philosophy.

>>5103602
this one really caught on around /lit/ these days.

>>5103627
if my original post seemed to you that I loathe academic philosophy, then I have failed. I'm not trying to implicate academic philosophy here. I'm not trying to turn this into another thread about analytics vs. continentals or STEM vs. letters or whatever.

>>5103659
check out the link to my book, Ethix!

it's primarily nonfiction. it's a book about ethics-- character, conversation, action, sure... but it's also a narrative of a pirate, of interpreting an ancient mystery, of diving into divinely inspired romance, of falling into existential crisis... of self-cultivation, self-sufficiency, and conversation; in a word, it's a discovery that's been in the making for years now.

>>5103662
agreed. but Penguin does publish philosophy beyond their Classics series. who published Paul Johnson's book*?

(*I do not endorse this book. I haven't read it-- I merely mention it as an example.)

>>5103711
>The young never write anything worth reading

who are Keats, Rimbaud, Raphael...

>>5103628
>...unless you can market it as some sort of self-help book I suppose.

yeah, this is probably how I'll have to pitch it, though I'm seriously considering just printing the damned thing myself.

if you see the text, you know that the formatting is unacceptable to any publisher (centered text, small caps, running borders)... so I'm thinking that I might do a scroll. (some have requested to buy a paper version.)

>>5103630
no, I don't... do you think that I should get one?

I only wrote the book now because pretty soon here, I'm going to die.

>>5103846
Do you have a terminal illness or something?

If you are interested in philosophy enough to write a book on ethics, I would certainly advise you to pursue it academically. It will orient you with the history of ideas and show you perspectives you probably would not have considered otherwise. It will also place you directly in an ongoing dialogue within that history of ideas. You can still write works for a wider audience that does not assume knowledge, but you also have less of a chance of writing something that has already been written before within that history. You will probably also write more coherently, since most programs require you to take some philosophical logic and analyze the arguments of those that came before from that perspective.

If that sounds appealing to you then, I would tell you to go for it.

>>5103711
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Fuck me you're a 21 year old from Chicago, Illinois.

That is young. What is your background in Philosophy? It reads like a very jumped up personality read Nietzsche and was so taken by it that they thought that they might do the same. That's not a comment on the content of your writing, it's just how it comes across.

It's not appealing. If I were you, I wouldn't bother trying to publish this, because you've no reputation. Do a degree, give some lectures; there are more surefire ways to get read.

But maybe the readership is less important - as it is, Stephanie Meyer has a substantial one. Why not cool down, live a little, and then come back to this writing malarky with something a little less premature.

>>5103874
thanks for the advice. I studied philosophy in college, so I have taken courses in syllogistic and symbolic logic... and I am privy to the latest academic debates in ethics and epistemology.

>>5104033
you sound like my dad. that's not a comment on the content of your writing, it's just...

really, thank you for reading. you aren't the first to tell me that my style is wacky. I get emails and calls about it every day. but the joke's on you-- I haven't read Nietzsche... yet.

some say "that one has to master the tradition before they can work outside of it." as for me, I've only read ancient, Hellenistic, and Middle English literature, so I can't pretend to any grand knowledge of modern and contemporary philosophy beyond your Descartes and Hume. my favorite authors are Plato, Chaucer, and Wilde. Leonard Nelson is another great, though he has faded into obscurity.

>>5103830

>Every moment matters.

Shit, strong opening, OP.

I'll try a read later; is there an email address on your website?

>>5103830
>http://www.humanactionnetwork.com/ethix-.html
Are you mentally ill?
>>5103846
Is your mental illness that's fatal?

Seriously, this is crap. Go the self help book route, and if you're lucky someone will read into your ramblings something deeper than what's actually there.

>>5104199
thanks, and good double.

>>5104227
thanks, and my email address is christophocles@humanactionnetwork.com .

>>5104273
maybe. probably. possibly.

I agree... but did you read the book?

>>5103830
Oh, it's you, Chris.
Read your Ethix a few months back. Good shit. Smitty's letter confused me, but I enjoyed it all the same. If I might ask, why'd you choose the letter to illustrate your points?

Okay, this text really isn't something for a philosophy journal or university press. This is a creative work, not a treatise or article.

>>5103830
Please do a scroll. I'd buy that so fucking hard.

>>5104322
Thank you, thank you, thank you.

well, for Smitty's Letter, I wanted to create a mystery. that's what's going on with the ancient tablets of wisdom. I realized one thing: if you want somebody to pay attention to you, pretend like you have a secret. for example, have you ever had somebody say, "anon, it's just... well, I shouldn't say. I can't tell you." of course, your response is "what?! tell me!"... well, the tablet, and, more, the entire book has a number mystery coursing through it. Smitty's letter contains all of the clues with which to crack the code. another hint: the spacing is deliberate in the book.

as for the letter format, it's really something I cribbed from Plato and Chaucer. if an author can distance themselves from the narrative, they can cheat judgment about their intentions, and shift the reader's gaze to another character. that's the deal with the Lover's Letter-- I wanted to earnestly represent idealism and feminism through a voice other than my own.

the story there is actually pretty interesting, truly worthy of posting:

back in college, I dated a girl with whom I fell in love. I broke up with her, citing the fact "we weren't going to get married, it's just going to end... what's the point?" obviously, she thought it was unbelievable. "What? How could you say that, Chris? It's so unlike you. What's the point of doing anything if it's just gonna end? What's the point of working if your career is just gonna end? What's the point of living if your life is just gonna end? You have to treat things like they're eternal-- otherwise, you'll never even allow yourself to do them in the first place." and I thought, "DAMN, that's pretty deep!" so I put it in the book. I wanted to channel the voice of a teenage girl, hence the grammar choices "eachother", no determiners, etc.

many people ask me whether I wrote the letters, which I consider a success.

thanks so much for reading. call or write me any time!

>>5104357
>Shouts out to Nesingwary for the help he did give!

Am I retarded or is this a reference to the world of warcraft Hemingway character?

>>5104419
Yep. It's almost certainly a WoW reference.

>>5103478
I don't really want to comb this whole thread so I'm sorry if this has already been said BUT
Try and seek out some local publishing houses. Most cities have at least a few and that way you can actually go in and meet with someone without having to travel.

Or you could try looking for an agent.

>>5104419
>not posting the full quote

"Shouts out to Nesingwary for the help he did give!
Nary a better archeologist ever did live.
Wary of my belabored introduction,
OK, just take yer bloom in' gift!"

Fuck, this kid can write.

>>5103830
http://www.humanactionnetwork.com/the-human-action-network..html

10/10, timecubed, would timecube again

>>5104500
Why do people still write in this archaic style?

>>5104330
thanks for reading. it's true, you know. my work began as a treatise, but it became immediately obvious to me that it would never, ever make it to the venues you mention.

I wrote a "Rejection Letter" that was going to be a stodgy academic's reaction to the first half of the book, but it was just too facile of a satire-- it felt like setting up a straw man just to knock him down.

>>5104331
thank you for reading. awesome, great to hear. it shouldn't be too difficult to produce the scroll-- I just need to print continuous lengths of paper. also, I want to see about some really nice handles/rollers for the thing. nothing ornate, but rather something in RGB anodized aluminium, machined to fold and lock unto itself for transport.

>>5104419
>>5104473
thank you for reading! good eye.

>>5104480
thanks for the advice. I'll have to see about this. there is almost certainly a publishing house for philosophy in Chicago. publishers like the University of Chicago Press would probably react in the same way I mentioned before.

>>5104500
HA! and doubles to boot!

>>5104508
man, I hadn't seen the timecube, so thanks for turning me on to that. I'm simply not worthy.

>>5103830
>Centered fucking text
>not left aligned

10/10 full of rage
good luck op