[ 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: 195 KB, 379x569, 0E821789-C231-4B57-8271-9499DED2D438.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18343556 No.18343556 [Reply] [Original]

Which piece of nonfiction should we as a modern society take the most seriously?

>> No.18343563

>>18343556
Pic unrelated

>> No.18343565 [DELETED] 

>18343563

>> No.18343567
File: 837 KB, 1777x1206, 1593275626377.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18343567

>>18343556
The Urantia Book

>> No.18343573
File: 16 KB, 328x500, 41ZYaF1KlCL._AC_SY1000_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18343573

>>18343567
Leibniz has never been refuted. You can only question his axioms, but not his reason.

>> No.18343590
File: 2.14 MB, 1667x2607, FE98F1A1-BF60-4DBC-B7F1-4137B592EF2A.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18343590

>> No.18343595

>>18343573
Kant schooled Leibniz on the existence of incongruent counterparts. If they exist the Monadology falls apart.

>> No.18343602
File: 288 KB, 1166x1750, 81g4JUKnBnL.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18343602

>> No.18343614

>taking espousements seriously
shiggy

>> No.18343688

>>18343595
Nope. Take a basic linear algebra class and you'll realize Kant's assertion that space needs to be external is flat out wrong. Two mirrored objects are still the same object, just with a mirroring matrix transformation applied to them (which can be reversed by the exact same type of transformation). Kant's argument is equivalent to saying that, because I can rotate a cube 90 degrees relative to another cube, they can't be the same cube. The only difference is mirroring is a more complex transformation that requires a more complicated mathematical process to return the mirrored object back to its old state. They are still fundamentally the same.

>> No.18343774
File: 24 KB, 325x500, scrutonn.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18343774

>> No.18343965
File: 14 KB, 252x400, iu.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18343965

>>18343556
Close enough buddy. You got the author right, but not the book.

>> No.18344173
File: 39 KB, 472x600, thetechnologicalsociety-zoom_grande.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18344173

>>18343556
It's too late for us, but this one could have saved us.

>> No.18344349
File: 216 KB, 1013x1694, 40wdmy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18344349

>>18343556
>Which piece of nonfiction should we as a modern society take the most serious

>> No.18344365

>>18344349
That is me ngl

>> No.18344495

>>18344365
i know. why would you make a thread asking what single book should be taken the most seriously? why would think it only be one book? try actually reading, taking notes, and then using the notes to find out what you're going to read next instead of garnering (You)'s on 4chan to make yourself feel better.

>> No.18344545

>>18344495
Calm down nigger it’s a bait thread

>> No.18346678

>>18344173
They're better things written on technology than Ellul's work. He grants too much power to his "technological system" thus leading to a useless technophobic and determinist conclusion.

Read Simondon instead, much more based.

>> No.18346701

>>18346678
There* fuck

>> No.18346711

>>18344495
cringe, but a bit based

>> No.18346959

>>18343556
The Holy Bible