/lit/ - Literature

Can you not do both?

>>7557197
I would say no, but to be righteous you must first have been sinful. Is that why so many good writers have lived in sin?

>sin
>righteousness

>>7557197
>fullest in sin
>righteousness
no

>Life is full of suffering, and its chief purpose is pleasure. There is no god and no after-life; men are the helpless puppets of the blind natural forces that made them, and that gave them their unchosen ancestry and their inalienable character. The wise man will accept this fate without complaint, but will not be fooled by all the nonsense of Confucius and Mozi about inherent virtue, universal love, and a good name: morality is a deception practised upon the simple by the clever; universal love is the delusion of children, who do not know the universal enmity that forms the law of life; and a good name is a posthumous bauble which the fools who paid so dearly for it cannot enjoy. In life the good suffer like the bad, and the wicked seem to enjoy themselves more keenly than the good.

>>7557208
good shit

>>7557208
but a wolrd of the wicked leaves nothing left for their children to enjoy. a world of the righteous allows their world to be inherited

>>7557188
I'd ram it in at full force even if it meant burning my scrotum.

In the end, we are nothing.

A man's true character is revealed when he realizes that he is barely existing, and will be wiped from history like a bit of dust from a shelf; hardly noticed, a slight inconvenience, forgotten by lunch.

In the widest, grandest view of the universe, one might say as a spectator that our time is nil, that only pleasure is worth anything. But they forget that man has a conscience, an indismissable and harsh master who is merciless in his reminders. So you have fun, perhaps just for a week, maybe for twenty years. In the pursuit of your hedonism, you have built nothing. Your friends are not your brothers. Your material wealth has gone to drinks and drugs and women and in the end, nobody will have anything to say about you. There is no visible mark. Only a stain in some dive bar, the last bit of your genetic code still in existence because a janitor is too lazy to wipe up ten year old spooge. And in the years leading to your erasure from existence, your conscience will utterly destroy you from within. Your guilt, your waste, it will ruin the enjoyment you have of your idols, your mammon and your toys, your utter failure at leaving a legacy, leaving love behind.

That is why selflessness and righteousness is important. From a personal view, one's lack of guilt and regret are far more valuable than being a retarded fuck and 'lmao imma be mean and nasty cuz YOLO hahaa'

>>7557208
Disgusting.

>>7557413
Being a normie out of fear for guilt and regret is sensible in a way but ascesis and resignation are even better forms of negative hedonism. When you truly realise the fleeting nothingness of life the best thing is to barely get involved and leave no trace.

>>7557188
I'd sin wit dat bitch right neh! She look dangerous!

>>7557199

fuck off cuck

>>7557208

kill yourself with your godless gooks

>>7557188

You'll realize how much of a retardation you life was and were never ever close from living the essential if you live a life full of sin

>>7557430
Without complaint, anon.

>>7557212
Mpre like gook shit upboate pls good sirs smiler with pointed nose

>>7557188
Righteousness is thought, time, and action spent striving towards personal self-acualization. Sin is anything else and should be minimized as much as possible.

>>7557450

geez. why can't you people just talk normally and discuss things without insulting each other and ignoring the main point?

Instead of typing out all those insults, wouldn't it be much better if you actually gave a proper argument to justify your belief?

you literally insulted someone's view and gave your own. How is that productive? How does that contribute to anything?

So, to make your post less of a shitpost than it currently is, I'll ask you to elaborate on the following:

>You'll realize how much of a retardation you life was and were never ever close from living the essential if you live a life full of sin

>>7558430

that's a good point mate. but who is to say that self-actualization is more important than hedonistic joy?

>should be

One "ought" to prefer self-actualization? I have no obligation to fulfill my potential. If I enjoy gluttony, why must I not pursue it?

If you find more happiness in the feeling of a faux righteousness then sure, that's the way for you.


--------
Also, sin needn't hinder self-actualization. An incredibly successful person who has achieved a lot can indulge in sin too.

>>7557236

Are you implying that one "ought" to leave a world for children to enjoy? Funny. I feel no such obligation.

I realize that my sin contributes to decadence as a whole but not enough to the point that decadence itself becomes more troublesome to me than sin is enjoyable.

>Simply follow nature, Rousseau declares. Sade, laughing grimly, agrees.

>>7558468

top kek. Where is that from?

>>7558479

>>7557188
who is this semen demon