/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.2294449]

how is literature an intellectual pursuit?
the great classics are philosophically shallow and scientifically inert.

other than subjective aesthetic value what can it offer a reader?

The problem is people can easily detect aesthetics in literature but it takes a sharp and practiced mind to detect it in nature, science, and mathematics...

Are literature/english enthusiasts just lazy or unequipped to tackle beauty that is both sublime and pragmatic?

[Richard Feynmann !Hwop/gspA. No.2294456]

beep boop study of literature illogical does not computer abort abort

[Anonymous No.2294464]

But I'm a physicist.

[Anonymous No.2294466]

>>2294456

thats' good point

[Richard Feynmann !Hwop/gspA. No.2294471]

>>2294464

your brain is warped in the same way, it is immaterial

[Anonymous No.2294477]

>>2294449
>>2294471
>>2294456


so no one on lit can refute OP
k

[Richard Feynmann !Hwop/gspA. No.2294486]

>>2294477

nobody is going to take the time to refute the existence of sasquatch on here either

scuttle back to your bunsen burners, boy

[Anonymous No.2294499]

>>2294486

oh he mad ^

[Anonymous No.2294502]

>>2294456
>Wait don't go whats your favorite dorito flavor

Every time

[Richard Feynmann !Hwop/gspA. No.2294507]

>>2294499

i am become wrath, pipette-licker

my anger is in superheated plasma form

[Anonymous No.2294508]

>>2294477
Well, OP's argument is based almost exclusively on assertions and he represents literature somewhat wrongly.

[Anonymous No.2294511]

>>2294477

>so no one on lit can refute OP

It looks like you aren't as smart as you think.

This is the problem with STEM majors (and I am one). Most believe that they've been given some esoteric knowledge and understanding of the world simply because they have a better grasp on the reductionist side of a narrow subject.

/sci/ is a perfect example of this problem, so many of them are stuck in the idea that one major is inherently better than other. Which is silly in a great number of respects through its institution worshiping nature. Hell, we now think that reductionism is finished and that our universe doesn't have some sort of unique and beautiful underlying structure.

It's kind of hilarious that people can get stuck in a primitive rut through something as amazing as science.

[Anonymous No.2294518]

>>2294449
this is a great and true post. however, I now feel even worse about how stupid I am. I guess I like to read because I'm not smart enough to be a physicist. I constantly wish I was.

[Anonymous No.2294521]

> Expecting anyone in the far past to tackle crazy concepts like space-time and the Big Bang without mysticism involved
> Implying many mathematicians and scientists weren't also philosophers.

3/10 OP.

[Anonymous No.2294525]

>>2294449
The sublime and pragmatic beauty you describe is a beauty foreign to the normal lives of people. It does not deal in love, or hate, or envy, or loneliness. It deals in perfection. Perhaps it also deals with the passion in the pursuit of said perfection.

However, the more I think about this the more I wonder why you implied the beauty of nature was akin to that of science and math (as opposed to literature). Of course they are linked, but I think they may be different things.

And haven't many of the great classics described and explored these topics (Not in the sense of academic discovery though, which is perhaps what you man when you say they are "scientifically inert". Please excuse Hemingway then for not discovering anything new about the ocean, except, perhaps, for one desperate man's experience of it)?

[Anonymous No.2294534]

>>2294511
>so many of them are stuck in the idea that one major is inherently better than other.

no one said that.
-1 reading comprehension

stem is better because it has both subjective beauty and pragmatic functions, while literature is simply subjective entertainment with very little pragmatism, relative to STEM it has no pragmatism..."relative"

but ya, -1 for reading comprehension.
next?

[Richard Feynmann !Hwop/gspA. No.2294535]

>>2294518

no, anon! a million times no!

the scientific establishment has invested vast amoutns of time and money to secure your belief in these chimeras, you've been duped

asserting the "smartness" of physicians/mathematicians/etc is nothing but a smokescreen to consolidate hegemonic power, don't play into their sick games

[Anonymous No.2294537]

>>2294518
Nah, I'm the physicist who posted before and I love reading, however I don't have too much time, I'm not that smart either, everyone can be a physicist with hard work.

[Anonymous No.2294538]

>>2294525

even if literature has sublime beauty, it still lacks pragmatic utility and application which the sciences all have--

[Anonymous No.2294541]

reported

[Richard Feynmann !Hwop/gspA. No.2294543]

>>2294534
>>2294538

utility and pragmatism are just a couple of imperialism's aliases

try viewing the world without a constant eeye toward "what can i exploit" and the value of literature may just reveal itself

[Anonymous No.2294546]

>>2294521

>> Implying many mathematicians and scientists weren't also philosophers.

Never implied that, in fact I said from the beginning pure classic "literature" is philosophically shallow...philosophers offer both beauty and pragmatic utility--they gave us jurisprudence, human rights, rule of law, and empiricism which led to science--

literature is only entertainment in comparison to both philosophy and science, it lacks utility and application--so overall it is an inferior pursuit...if one values utility, society, etc...

[Anonymous No.2294547]

>>2294534

If you read what you quoted, you would see it is an aside.

You're argument holds no water in the face of a postreductionist(I'm having a little fun here, since I'm sure you'll bitch about that) world.

[Anonymous No.2294552]

I studied English Literature because I felt pressured into choosing a degree (and consequently, a career) far before I was mature enough to make such important decisions.

It the subject I was best at, and I still believed in the essentially decency of people, purpose, etc. I thought I would be able to make something from it.

I ended up with a handful of bills and no job prospects.

If you want to work in Advertising, sure, study English, but you're fucked if you think you can do anything else with it.

OP is largely correct. I love reading but the benefits extend little beyond catharsis, helping to keep your mind active, and training you to pick up on the subtexts of another. A practical pursuit is more worthy of your time.

[Anonymous No.2294561]

You don't detect aesthetics, you insert them.

>>2294543
That may win the dumbfuck post of the day award.

[Richard Feynmann !Hwop/gspA. No.2294557]

>>2294546

your bourgeois values are beneath contempt

you are a grub in the mud and there is not a necktie expensive enough to change that

[Anonymous No.2294564]

>>2294552
Where did you study?

[Anonymous No.2294566]

Scientific elitism is for the angsty atheistic teen metal head who reads popular science and scientific american thinking it will make them scientifically fluent. There is value in all academic fields.

[Anonymous No.2294574]

FOR EXAMPLE, Game breathed life into the great cultural artifacts of the past.

THE RED AND THE BLACK, my favorite novel, details how "Game" functioned in the 18th century. I read the book before I discovered Roissy, but now it makes more sense.

http://orangeraisin.wordpress.com/2010/07/17/the-red-and-the-black/

MADAME BOVARY offers a wealth of details on the rules of courtship in the 19th century. It analyzes on a microscopic level many details of Game. Charles Bovary is your stereotypical nice guy, who rouses the absolute DISDAIN of his wife for being too nice.

RODOLPHE is the perfect player; he does everything right, from Peacocking, to the Neg, to instilling DREAD. He also gets some of the best lines in the book.

Look me in the face feminists, and tell me that the Red and the Black and Madame Bovary are trashy novels written by weirdos to pander to misogynist fantasies.

[Anonymous No.2294578]

>>2294543
>try viewing the world without a constant eeye toward "what can i exploit"

except its the eye of "what can I produce or discover that will benefit mankind and solve problems"

instead of just "what other book should I consume in order to increase my pleasure" which is no different than watching Jersey Shore all day--pragmatically

[Anonymous No.2294591]

http://www.the-spearhead.com/2009/10/12/mr-bardamus-bookshelf-the-wandering-eyes-of-unsatisfied-wome
n/

[Anonymous No.2294596]

http://www.inmalafide.com/blog/2009/09/07/one-badboy-to-beat-them-all/

Woman! experience might have told me
That all must love thee, who behold thee:
Surely experience might have taught
Thy firmest promises are nought;
But, plac’d in all thy charms before me,
All I forget, but to adore thee.
Oh memory! thou choicest blessing,
When join’d with hope, when still possessing;
But how much curst by every lover
When hope is fled, and passion’s over.
Woman, that fair and fond deceiver,
How prompt are striplings to believe her!
How throbs the pulse, when first we view
The eye that rolls in glossy blue,
Or sparkles black, or mildly throws
A beam from under hazel brows!
How quick we credit every oath,
And hear her plight the willing troth!
Fondly we hope ’twill last for ay,
When, lo! she changes in a day.
This record will for ever stand,
“Woman, thy vows are trac’d in sand.”

[Anonymous No.2294611]

>>2294596

this is so much better than that anime spam

[Anonymous No.2294616]

>>2294596
Sound familiar? To summarize: “Women are amoral and flaky. When they fall out of love with you, beware. Don’t trust them implicitly or put them on a pedestal.” Keep in mind that this poem was written in 1806. Byron knew the truth about the less-fair sex long before a community had to be formed in order to spell it out.

[Anonymous No.2294625]

>>Roissy
>>Keep her guessing. True to their inscrutable natures, women ask questions they don’t really want direct answers to. Woe be the man who plays it straight – his fate is the suffering of the beta. Evade, tease, obfuscate. She thrives when she has to imagine what you’re thinking about her, and withers when she knows exactly how you feel.

>>Stendhal
>>He knew very well that the next morning, by eight o’clock, Mathilde would be in the library; he did not go there until nine o’clock, burning with love, but with his head dominating his heart. Not one minute went by, perhaps, without his repeating to himself, “I must keep her constantly occupied with this great doubt: ‘Does he love me?’ Her brilliant position, and the flattery of everyone who speaks to her, make her a little too sure of herself.”

[Richard Feynmann !Hwop/gspA. No.2294626]

>>2294578

if the scientifc mindset is about benefiting mankind why are there so many on /sci/ who aspire to go into the petroleum industry? i thought glboal warming was widely recognized by the scientific community

and any paradigm that equates all literature with jersey shore is not one that appeals to me, you may keep your robotic pragmatism

[Anonymous No.2294630]

>>2294538
Well that depends what the reader wants to get out of his literature and what kinds of literature he reads. Much of it is internal though. It probably won't get bridges built or cancers cured, but maybe it will give a person a new motivation or new ideal which will set on the course to building bridges and curing cancer.

There's literature dealing with every kind of theme and topic. The person could be wrestling with what it means to be black in america and so he could read Invisible Man and see how Ellison frames the topic. They might have religious issues from their childhood and they don't quite know where to go with it so they might read The Brothers Karamazov.

Literature can tie experiences and ideas in such a way as to mirror life but, because one takes it in as a work of art, one can get a better (or at least a different) view of it that can help a person make sense of their life.

There's also the idea that taking in beauty, all by itself, makes a person better in some way. I'm not sure about that, but it's worth mentioning. Maybe it heals them psychologically or something like that.

Of course, if you are starving you can't worry about stuff like this. Probably a good idea to worry about how to get food first and then afterwards worry about why you wanted to live in the first place.

[Anonymous No.2294631]

Are you trying to say literature does not contain philosophy, science, and all those matters with it?

I am not quite understanding your argument OP. I mean fictional stories like Thus Spoke Zarathustra, for example, are made to portray the philosophical ideals while also showing how characters reflect and react and what events carry out. Criticism and satire are one of the biggest things literature can execute that other mediums can't do as well, along with being rich with concepts of beauty, setting, etc. How am to know the beauty of 15th century Europe unless one describes it to me, and thus I can imagine it. I value my imagination over any reality.

[Anonymous No.2294640]

>>2294564

A mid-league University in North Wales. The lecturers know what they're teaching is essentially useless. You should see the modules they offer. But to admit that the students are fucked is to admit that their own jobs are unnecessary, as are their limited talents and sleeve-worn biases.

Honestly, you wouldn't believe some of the shit that went down in seminars. A group of twenty astute young students in direct contrast to every word said about Dickens, or Austen. The generational divide was tangible at all times.

[Anonymous No.2294655]

>>2294626
>if the scientifc mindset is about benefiting mankind why are there so many on /sci/ who aspire to go into the petroleum industry?

impeccable logic
*not*

[Richard Feynmann !Hwop/gspA. No.2294660]

>>2294655

oh, well then, the pelicans in teh gulf will be happy to learn i was mistaken and they are not covered in oil now

[Anonymous No.2294661]

>>2294626
you're inferring the motives and obligations of the entire scientific community based off of the people who post on /sci/. what the fuck are you retarded?

[Anonymous No.2294662]

>>2294626
Your idea of "benefiting mankind" is not everyone's idea of benefiting mankind.

[Anonymous No.2294668]

>>2294552

This isn't about a major or institutionalized education, but rather the broader picture of where literature plays a role in the grand scheme of things.

[Richard Feynmann !Hwop/gspA. No.2294671]

>>2294662

...said the rest of the world to the scientific community

[Anonymous No.2294674]

>>2294640
What have you been doing to make money?

[Anonymous No.2294699]

I just read for entertainment. I guess reading sharpens your mind or whatever, I don't know.

[Anonymous No.2294701]

Literature to me seems like the best medium for things to be processed within our current era. You can control and absorb the message it gives to you, as opposed to visual technology and mediums of the like that just feed you stimulation. You brain processes reading and causes you to think and imagine.

Einstein, for example, didn't find E=mc^2 through practical matters. He found it by first imaging, whilst on a trolley, that he was travelling at the speed of light. He also imagined while in a patent office or library (I can't recall), of a man falling within a elevator, which helped him comprise the idea of relativity.

It's not that literature is the most important medium in these matters, but that it exercises the mind into triggering innovation and imagination, and abstract concepts of value and belonging that other subjects can't quite cover.

[Anonymous No.2294702]

>>2294674

I'm working in a bookshop about twenty hours a week, trying to find something with more hours and better pay. I can't go into fucking Marketing. I'll bend, but to be lead into the Law/Ad/Marketing triumvirate would run contrary to most of what I like in the world.

Have been considering starting a business, but my options aren't looking good on that front. Such is life when you've been herded into the Liberal Arts with the rest of the cattle.

[Anonymous No.2294711]

itt
>people who have neither a single clue about nor any experience with science/math and methods of scientific thinking