/lit/ - Literature

YouTube videos of actual debates

Philosophy subreddits

>>6325909
lel reddit is for fags

>>6325916
yeah man because you = 4chan right? do you go around telling everyone that you're a member of the /lit/erati too?

>>6325932
Yeah whatever, go post on your circlejerk threads fag

Mailing Lists or certain IRC's. Pseudonymous forums.

Rationalwiki actually has good debates.

>>6325944
>>6325909
Yeah I'll just go pay a quick visit to certainIRCs.com thanks for the help.

Can we get some damned namedrops in here, please?

>>6325969
Nope, because then my IRC channels would get flooded with boring pseudo-intellectuals, meme-kids and trolls.

But just to start you off, consider going to a website that's not 4chan.org. There's a lot of them out there. You'll find what you're looking for if you care to find it.

electronic versions of texts, books, essays etc.

(reading books with variegated and contending ideas is sitting in on a giant dialogue between great minds, with wonderful and detailed ideas carefully explained)

sorry that's not helpful i know

>>6325892
>What places on the internet are best for observing intellectual discussion?
There aren't any. What if I told you that?
Well I just did and I mean it. Intellectual discussion is hard to come by these days. And the internet does nothing to foster it either.

>>6325937
The irony is half the posts on /lit/ are the same circle jerk shit about spooks and the greeks and DFW, etc

>>6325998
You categorically wrong. The internet is enormous, and there is plenty of great discussion on it. You just don't see it because you don't seek it out. How many websites have you even been to in the past year? 5? 10? There are millions.

>>6326005
*You're

some threads on philosophyforums.com are good

>>6326001
You're free to leave. Please do actually.

http://sinatrafamily.com/forum/index.php

http://sinatrafamily.com/forum/forumdisplay.php/19-High-Hopes


Go to town.

>>6326005
I've been to a lot of them. I've done a lot of internet discussion. I know a lot of people who run popular blogs and internet journals.

I know that the kind of discussion that takes place on the internet is really degrading. It's a great resource, sure. but not a good place for discussion. Luckily I've been privilege to actual IRL intellectual discussions and debates. They far exceed anything you will find on the internet.

>>6325892
4chan of course

>>6326032
Obviously discussion outside of the internet is better then on, but there's plenty of great mailing lists where great discussion ensues, in addition to smaller forums and IRC channels. Exchanging emails with people is probably the best way to have good discussion on the internet because it encourages reflection, unlike a forum.

nationstates.net forums, general

:^)

watch pod-casts, partiallyexaminedlife is good. idk forums

/lit/ is the least worst place tbh.

>>6326069
You know nothing.

>>6326070
name me a less shitty place for talking about philosophy online

inb4 it's too le secret, my secret club i won't tell you

>>6326073
http://forums.philosophyforums.com/

/lit/ is shit for anything other than bubblegum discussion. Anonymity brings out the retards. And yeah, there are places I won't tell you about.

>>6326045

>great mailing lists

Okay gramps.

>>6326069
Not in the least, the fact that you think so reflects very badly on you.

>>6326080
>Anonymity brings out the retards.
And namefagging brings popularity contests and people trying to keep a consistent image as a poster rather than speaking their mind at any given time. I prefer retards to those safe and boring cunts.

>And yeah, there are places I won't tell you about.
I knew you were one of those people.

>>6325892
>http://forums.philosophyforums.com/

As people have said.
It might have many amateurs on but is still much better than /lit/ as a whole.

>>6326098
name me a less shitty place for talking about philosophy online

inb4 it's too le secret, my secret club i won't tell you

also, why are you lads even here then?

>>6326080
>click on a thread
>OP has a MLP avatar
>some guy who responds has 'hedonistic nihilist' under his username
>someone named postmodern beatnik
>random old guy using an actual photo of himself in a hat as an avatar who says he's "just trying to figure things out"

>>6326105
Same reason I still smoke, eat chocolate and don't work-out, difference between me and you is that I am willing to accept that it is bad for me.

>inb4 it's too le secret, my secret club i won't tell you
Basically that.
You honestly think someone cares enough about what some anon on fucking 4chan of all places thinks about them so as to risk spoiling their source of actual stimulation?

I highly doubt anyone here actually believes that /lit/ is not shit, including you, I presume the whole reason your posting is to try and coax someone into spilling the beans on their secret club.

Better to continue your search onto http://forums.philosophyforums.com/ for starters.

>>6326001
yeah but we circle jerk ironically.

>>6326101
>I prefer retards to those safe and boring cunts.

Those safe and boring cunts actually have incentive to make sense as opposed to saying any form of bullshit.

These aren't issues like "femanons do you really care about the size of your bf's dick, serious answers only plz?" where people like you believe you have access to the superior "redpill" via anonymous imageboards.

There's a reason there is so much stress on credibility in academia, people interested in learning have a huge opportunity cost associated with trying to understand someone's bullshit, which is why they want to make sure that they don't waste time trying to understand bullshit.

>>6325892
gamefaqs

>>6326113
hahaha

>>6326135
This.

Think of two kinds of discussions, one is a discussion where you need an honest opinion (plz r8, does x really matter to women, etc) another is a discussion where you're looking to have your thoughts provoked (What does x philosopher mean by y, etc).

The former is better suited for imageboards the latter for forums.

For example, EJMR is a good anonymous forum for postgrads and prospective PhD students to discuss the academic scenery given that when you are deciding which college to go to, you're going to want honest opinions from insiders, which you can only get through a cover of anonymity. You're willing to compromise on credibility as long as there is a chance that the opinion you get is honest.

In the latter, case, say you want to know on what basis Kant established his cat-i, you wouldn't give a shit if the person replying to you doesn't actually believe what he is writing, or if he isn't actually a Kantian but says he is since he did so a week ago, or if the only reason he is on the forum is so that he can impress a a qt3.14 asian to let him do anal, as long as he gets you to think.

>>6326032
>It's a great resource, sure. but not a good place for discussion. Luckily I've been privilege to actual IRL intellectual discussions and debates. They far exceed anything you will find on the internet.

Most intellectuals spend more time reading and learning than they do expressing their opinions, by virtue of this fact it is probably harder to get a hold of them online than it is to in real life, given that you will probably meet based off a convenient academic setting and such.

The par of the discussion shouldn't be too different once you get the right connections online though, so if you're not a total aspie who lives in the basement, it's probably a good idea not to bother too much about finding the right online community for yourself.

In any case, given that most of us are below 25, we have a huge resource for stimulation just off books and existing material, discussion is not completely necessary to learn compared to how vital it was for say, the greeks.

I don't really care about "intellectual discussion" I just want to talk about books with less trolling. I'd prefer to avoid philosophy altogether since we all know how that worked for /lit/. But I don't want some completely sanitized "pleb" dump like r/books. Is Metafilter good? What about LibraryThing? I'm not that drawn to goodreads but I update it when I finish a book.

>>6326222
why not try making friend with similar interests in real life m8?

>>6326222
Metafilter is pretty good, usually quite smart, probably a bit overly/irrationally sympathetic to feminist causes and queer issues when feminism appropriates them, but not so much that it is annoying or disruptive. You won't find much lit discussion, although most people seem pretty well read.

But it's slow as shit cause they edit the front page, and they have a pretty Farky sense of humor. r/literature is pretty good, it's like a medium ground between this and metafilter, though also quite slow.

4chan of course

>>6326232

I'm really shy. I probably have some low level social anxiety and a bit of emotional scarring from avoidable and dumb things I did when I was still a teenager. I also have a weird voice. IDK I'm just scared of getting rejected by people. I'm not even that weird of a guy.

>>6326264

I have posted on there from time to time and I have noticed that people will write essays for posts which I find really offputting. I stumbled upon metafilter threads when I was searching for random stuff and they seemed level headed and knowledgeable. I love /lit/ I've posted here since 2011 but I've just found it shit lately. There is just way too much off topic posting this board needs a good purge.

>>6326423
>people will write essays for posts which I find really offputting

Fucking casual, go back to reddit.

>>6326454

suck my cock fag

>>6326454
People who can't into brevity are the worst kind. Often 90% of those essay length post is superfluous masturbation hoping to trick people into thinking they're hot shit.

>>6325892
http://lesswrong.com/

Only extreme specialist forums will ever have high-quality discussions. Any generalist forum will be filled with idiots.