[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 15 KB, 312x499, 1512351661765.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10563280 No.10563280 [Reply] [Original]

Why haven't you read the most groundbreaking work of philosophy in the 21st century yet? Valberg flawlessly proves that whatever happens to our consciousness at death, the next stage cannot be nothing.

>> No.10563424

>>10563280
give me a quick rundown an you might convince me to waste my time on this book

>> No.10563504

>>10563424
You waste your time all the time doing shit that doesn't even matter anon. And yet you don't want to waste your time on a book which might change your future.

>> No.10563507

>>10563504
>might change your future

See: every self-help book

>> No.10563509

>>10563280
>21st century philosophy
I pity you.

>> No.10563524

why is philosophy still a thing when we have science

>> No.10563630

>>10563509
>allowing unwarranted prejudices towards particular epochs dictate your opinions on works that you haven't even read

I pity you

>>10563524
>philosophy and science are mutually exclusive lines of inquiry

holy...

>> No.10563642

>>10563280
Thats not a good thing, you know

>> No.10563711

>>10563630
>didn't even read the book he's shilling
holy...
I pity (You)

>> No.10563714

>>10563280
It's saturday, JayJay. Why don't you go outside for a bit and find yourself some fun?

>> No.10563719

>>10563524
The sciences are a part of philosophy. The sciences have a different method compared to other branches of philosophy. If you want to debate which is better you should bring that up

People will flip their shit about that assertion but it really is the case

>> No.10563727

>>10563719
Science is a branch of philosophy.

>> No.10563733

>>10563727
Philosophy is the branch of the sciences for the lazy airheads.

>> No.10563735

>>10563280
If you attempt was to get us to read this book, you are really not doing yourself (or the author) any justice. Why don't you lose your edge, and simply write out a detailed analysis on why we should be reading this book. Your one liner posts are not cutting it.

This is your second chance, if you really do care about this book, I suggest you take it, and do it right. Get started now.

>> No.10563739

>>10563727
I just said that

>>10563733
Stop that

>> No.10563745
File: 412 KB, 5000x5000, xXtBhav.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10563745

>>10563630
Would you consider the philosophy of the stone age equal in consideration to today's philosophy? No? It's almost as though some periods are defined by greater or worse intellectual merit...

>> No.10564654

>>10563735
I don't give a FUCK nigga

>> No.10565587
File: 15 KB, 350x499, 31WALjcrxJL._SX348_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10565587

I have.