/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.18228966]

Hey fuckers,
How about instead of making a hundred threads everyday about a book you haven't read yet asking "Thoughts?" or "What am I in for?" you actually go read a book, then post your thoughts on it with some relevant questions so we can actually have some proper discussion around here.
Sincerely,
Bastard

[Anonymous No.18229029]

Because people don't respond to those threads unless they want to ruin them

[Anonymous No.18229035]

>>18228966
Reading’s boring

[Anonymous No.18229037]

>>18228966
But I don't want to read, I want to make threads...

[Anonymous No.18229041]

because the book may not be worth my time
that's the whole point of asking people for stuff you dumb idiot

[Anonymous No.18229052]

Good idea. I read Crime and Punishment. I was wondering whether anyone had any thoughts on Raskolnikov's issue with morality. Is he only wrong because he isn't an Alexander or a Napoleon? He seems correct about these sorts of people, it seems obvious that anyone of sufficient power doesn't play by the rules.

[Anonymous No.18229123]

>>18229052
Yeah Raskolnikov's criticisms of morality seemed to jive with Nietzsche's thoughts of a slave/master morality. Those who are capable to exert power and influence over others are justified in doing so on the basis of their superiority. The rabble can criticize such figures, but never as equals -- only as prey who wishes not to be preyed upon.

[Anonymous No.18229160]

>>18229123
It began the question of Doestevsky's perspective. Would it be wrong to think that he himself had a very pessimistic (in philosophical terms, like Shopenhauer) view of morality that he only rejected because of his faith. If this is true, then makes it seem like Rodya was also sort of emblematic of Doestevksy's intellectual development. E.g, Rodya being saved by giving into Christ at the end of the book.

[Anonymous No.18229190]

>>18228966
Haha, no

[Anonymous No.18229411]

>>18229160
I think you're absolutely right about Dostoyevsky's inherent pessimism being overcome by his faith. A battle raged within him between his faith and intellectual nihilism, which I believe he uses as the source of the rift between Alyosha and Ivan in The Brothers Karamazov. Ivan's espousal of his atheism to Alyosha is as cogent and convincing as any atheist could manage. But Alyosha's simply appeals to his faith, which for him is a conduit to God's grace. Alyosha's claaim to suprarational knowledge of God seems to be Dostoyevsky's own path around the intellectual pitfalls of religious faith. He yields to a type of transcendental knowledge, knowledge that can be at odds with the intellect; a knowledge of God transcends reason. I struggle with this solution personally, though I fervently wish for faith. The nihilism of the intellect is dangerous, which Nietzsche and Dostoyevsky both saw to be true.

[Anonymous No.18229534]

>>18229411
That is a very interesting point, seriously. I honestly have never conceptualized Doestevsky as possibly having troubles with his faith, but I think most Christians do, so it would be fair to assume he did as well. What you've described reminded me of Pascal, but not the Wager. After he explains the Wager, the subsequent section is devoted to arguing why giving into faith is better, even if you can't rationally prove God's existence. He says "You will be faithful, honest, humble, grateful, a doer of good works, a good friend, sincere and true. Admittedly you will not dwell admit tainted pleasures, in glory and luxury, but will you not have others?". This sentiment, that faith simply brings more happiness, is of course debatable. However I think it is the same sentiment that I get from story of Crime and Punishment, and im rather convinced that it is what Doestevsky was trying to convey. It may well be something he maintained, and hence may have been how he overcome, as you've labeled it, an intellectual nihilism.

Pascal's Wager is very interesting, but I think people tend to take it out of the context that makes it just as much an argument about happiness as an eschatalogical gamble.

[Anonymous No.18229887]

>>18228966
This frog speaks true. "Thoughts" or "he was based" or other assorted one liners produce no discussion.

[Anonymous No.18230158]

>>18229052
>>18229123
>>18229160
>>18229411
>>18229534
What do you guys think of The Dead House, I haven't yet read TBK, but so far, that has been my favorite. In my mind, it is a much more personal tale, and the meandering nature of the narrative is endearing to me.

[Anonymous No.18230170]

>>18230158
Sorry friend, havnt read it. I havnt read much Doestevsky at all. Ill change that tho, and next time you ask around maybe I'll be able to talk to you <3 :3

[Anonymous No.18230459]

>>18228966
I do this, they usually get ten replies. But if I make a thread hypothesizing about Pynchons personal life it get >100

[Anonymous No.18230479]

OP I have this same frog with this same filename, thoughts?

[Anonymous No.18230514]

>>18229887
Does the religion larps or is x the best/worst thread count as discussion ?

[Anonymous No.18230568]

>>18230514

[Anonymous No.18231326]

>>18230459
/lit/ is for historical gossip

[Anonymous No.18231330]

>>18230479
Sounds like OP saved your image.

[Anonymous No.18231337]

>>18228966
Book recommendations with this feel?