/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.13503187]

Stop reading Descartes. Stop reading Sartre.

[Anonymous No.13504056]

>>13503187
ok martin
does jew pussy tastes authentic?

[Anonymous No.13504071]

im 100 pages into being and time right now and so far he has said absolutely nothing besides definitions of his terms based on their relationship to other terms he also made up

descartes was nowhere near as pretentious as this old clown and sartre actually made sense what he was talking about

[Anonymous No.13504106]

>>13504071
Don't be such a lazy philistine. This is probably your one opportunity to humble yourself and learn to read philosophy. If you keep acting smug and dismissive, and demanding that any given text lay itself open at your feet, you will waste this opportunity to learn that reading philosophy is about raising yourself to the level of the text and is actually an initiatic rite of creative destruction (solve et coagula).

Even if you end up disagreeing with Heidegger he's not particularly complicated and you should still learn to understand him unless you want up end up like Sartre, who is a middling psychologist who didn't understand Heidegger, or Descartes, who never achieved a phenomenological standpoint and remained trapped in an ontic ontology of substance and subjectivity.

[Anonymous No.13504265]

>implying Heidegger would ever say either of those things

[Anonymous No.13504374]

>>13504106
Will you be my dad?

[Anonymous No.13504387]

>>13504071
which translation?

[Anonymous No.13504424]

I say...stop reading Bradley, old chap!

[Anonymous No.13505576]

>>13504387
joan stambaugh

inb4 your obscure 1958 translation by a catholic minister that is better

blow it out your ass faggot