/lit/ - Literature

>>16148354
I can't recognise any of them so I'd recon no.

>>16148423
Nibba, board culture is to let other people own you, not do it yourself

>>16148354
Who's in the middle?

>>16148430
>Nibba, board culture is to let other people own you, not do it yourself
What did he mean by this?

On another note, please tell me who these people are then.

>>16148456
dont worry about it

Normally when you do one of these threads with an unnamed picture of a guy and "IS HE BASED" you at least make the picture image searchable. You can all people pseuds for saying these are obscure all you want, the simple fact is 0.01% of /lit/ is going to recognize any of these three, let alone more than one.

I recognized the right as Levinas but I'm one of the few here who reads him, and even I had to guess and then google him to be sure. I've been on /lit/ since 2011 and I guarantee Levinas comes up here maybe once or twice a year.

Why not just post their fucking names or put it in the filename. These threads are usually pretentious and pointless but this one is among the worst I've seen yet.

>>16148474
It's an ancient bust of Plato, the oldest and well-known image of St Augustine, and then the Jew. But yeah you're right.

>>16148450
saint agustine f hippo

>>16148463
hello Dylan

>>16148450
saint augustine of hippo aka my nigga

>>16148497
now i must be the newfag, cause i dont get the ref

>>16148463
Please explain.

>>16148487
I could recognize half a dozen images of Augustine as him instantly but not this one and I have both read Augustine recently and studied the church fathers. I've also read Plato cover to cover and like I said have been on /lit/ for ten years and have never seen that bust of him.

Not saying any of this to brag because who gives a fuck just saying it's a good litmus test for how silly these threads can be, because I of all people should recognize them. These threads invariably have a bunch of "who dat?" first replies.

>>16148528
you're right, i just made a shitty image and this thread is shit. i'll be going now

>>16148564
No I am just autistic and coming across as more harsh than necessary. I agree with your OP but could you explain why these three specifically? Plato is obvious for resisting nihilism but are you specifically Christian, if so why Augustine (less than fully platonist), and why Levinas specifically?

I am mainly familiar with Levinas through the things he said about intersubjectivity, do you think he has a genuine theistic element?

I never understood whether Buber was just using God's alterity as a neat way of talking about extreme alterity (similar to how Levinas uses love I think?) or if he was actually a sincere believer

>>16148354
Plato was a nihilist. Augustine was a nihilist. The last I do not know.

>>16148590
I was reading John Milbank's Theology and Social Theory recently. The confrontation of his Catholic thought with French Nietzsche-followers of the '60-'80s reminded me that there is still real alternative living to capitalist hedonistic degeneracy out there. I'm not a catholic except forced through baptism, but he ends his book with a discussion on After Virtue, Plato & Aristotle, finishing with De Civita Dei. Anyway, I finally see the influx of LARPing Augustine readers for what it is, an escape from the 'age of cynical reason', except I'm not religious, so I'm looking for virtue away from religion ultimately. Levinas the Jew was an ethics-as-first-philosophy guy so I included him, exactly because his intersubjectivity seems to be deeply ethical, at the same time he has this ontology = violence stuff though. Plato is obvious because his eternal forms attracts against nihilist historicization. I mean I known Kantian ethics and so on, but it's all predicated on bourgeois norms which are fleeting.

>>16149192
Either you're a Platonists or a nihilist, there is no in-between. And you certainly can't be both.