/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.14756746]

How do you understand Nick Land? He draws on so many different thinks and never explains anything at all.
Are you even supposed to understand him?

[Anonymous No.14756765]

just read this
https://jacobitemag.com/2017/05/25/a-quick-and-dirty-introduction-to-accelerationism/

[Anonymous No.14756789]

>>14756746
What was wrong with the other thread, Nick?
>>14740397

[Anonymous No.14756797]

nick land is a thinker of profound shallowness. you may think there is some amazing cosmology behind his thinking but really it's just a shattered mess of shitposting. the punchline is that people actually take him seriously.

i realize that nick land has actually written academic philosophy (some of his papers I have actually liked as a former student of german idealism and romanticism), but don't go looking to something like fanged noumena for a coherent system of philosophy.

accelerationism is mental entertainment.

[Anonymous No.14756809]

>>14756797
He's being taught in some of the top universities.

Name a better modern philosopher.

[Anonymous No.14756839]

>>14756809
Lmao no he's not. Literally no one except extremely online millenials have even heard of him.

[Anonymous No.14756859]

>>14756839
Dude i'm not even the guy you were responding too lol

[Anonymous No.14756893]

>>14756746
There's nothing to understand. He wrote Fanged Noumena while under a severe meth induced psychosis.

[Anonymous No.14756900]

>>14756797
Let's be brutally honest, this is what all continental philosophy has been since Heidegger

[Anonymous No.14756904]

>>14756746
Keep in mind that Nick Land is more of a "Kim Kardashian" with respect to bullshit artistry.

[Anonymous No.14757174]

I use AI generated stories to understand him

[Anonymous No.14757326]

>>14756839
Disprove him then.

You know you can't.

[Anonymous No.14758284]

>>14756893
is there source for this because that's pretty fucking based

[Anonymous No.14758295]

>>14756797
>some of his papers I have actually liked as a former student of german idealism and romanticism)
What do you get out of them that you cannot just easily, and more clearly and originally, find in what Adorno or Deleuze said about Kant etc?

[Anonymous No.14758296]

>>14756746
you don't. He was refuted by Ted Kaczynski

[Anonymous No.14758353]

>>14758296
based, the only way to stop the process is to kill everyone who could be part of it

[Anonymous No.14758413]

>>14756900
>Incidentally, at a time when the universality of spirit has grown so much stronger and singularity, as is fitting, has become correspondingly less important, when, too, universality claims and holds on to its whole range and cultivated wealth, the share in the total work of spirit that falls to the activity of the individual can only be small. Because of this, the individual must all the more forget himself, as the nature of science in any case requires. Of course, he must become and do what he can; but less must be demanded of him, just as he in turn can expect less of himself, and may demand less for himself.

[Anonymous No.14759661]

>>14758296
He unironically loves Kazynski though, calls him one of the greatest philosophical minds of our time

[Anonymous No.14759677]

>>14756789
>What was wrong with the other thread, Nick?
Banned in neo-China.

[Anonymous No.14759691]

>>14756746
He has a womanish approach. It's about how it makes you feel rather than understanding and explaining.

[Anonymous No.14759713]

>>14756746
https://cybertrophic.wordpress.com/2020/01/04/on-nick-land-the-weird-libertarian/

[Anonymous No.14759765]

>>14759713
why do all libertarians look like this?

[Anonymous No.14759779]

>>14758296
>all you want to do is live like a hermit out in nature and get people thinking about anti-tech revolution
>mailbomb your way to having a manifesto printed in WaPo and NYT
>let your faggoty brother turn you in
>live like a hermit in solitary
>beautiful natural scenery in the middle of Nowhere Colorado
>three hots, a cot, laundry
>spend all day corresponding with admirers about anti-tech revolution
>dab on your brother like a madman, everyone reads the letter, sides with you
>that smug fucking smirk

Somebody won here and it wasn't the law.

[Anonymous No.14759801]

>>14759765
It's a race-specific bioweapon made by jews to target Anglo-Saxons.

[Anonymous No.14759849]

>>14756746
>How do you understand Nick Land?
I don't

[Anonymous No.14759862]

Kinda funny how everyone uses that photo from 20 years ago, he looks much more JUSTed by now.

[Anonymous No.14759873]

>>14759862
Ideologically speaking there are two Nick Lands. It's the appropriate pic for the OP.

[Anonymous No.14759887]

>>14756797
>you may think there is some amazing cosmology behind his thinking but really it's just a shattered mess of shitposting.
I actually do get value out of some of his work, but when you step back and look at it in broad terms you can tell he blew his brains to bits by taking too much meth. There was probably a decent mind in there at one point, but now all that's left is a shattered mess containing the odd shard of keen observation.

[Anonymous No.14759902]

>>14756746
He is a poet/artist, not an actual academic philosopher. Because of this, he actually does have some impact.

[Anonymous No.14759940]

>>14759801
How do you explain Hoppe then?

[Anonymous No.14760175]

>>14759661
source?

[Anonymous No.14760199]

>>14759902
>He is a poet/artist
lmao

[Anonymous No.14760204]

>>14760175
>>14759661
He doesn't. He just posted a quote on twitter because it could be misconstrued as part of his own philosophy.

[Anonymous No.14760237]

>>14759940
Another unfortunate victim.

[Anonymous No.14760260]

Hey does anyone in this thread have that image comparing nu-scientists (atheistic) to influential scientists (theistic)?

[Anonymous No.14760299]

>>14760260
sure, buddy, right here: >>>/reddit/

[Anonymous No.14760330]

>>14760204
No he really is a big fan. He's talked about him more than once