/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.2877071]

What are some books you would highly recommend to an intelligent young person? What books had a great impact on you when you were young (I suppose I'll define "young" as anywhere from early teens to early 20's).
Pic related, I'm about a quarter of the way through it. I'm 18 and a week away from going to college and I feel like I'm reading this at the perfect time in my life.

[Anonymous No.2877081]

I read it when I was 19, fantastic book, one of my favourites.

Bit sad as it progresses as you realise this may have been the alternate life of the author, the character choosing the career and people that the author rejected to maintain his life as a writer.

[Anonymous No.2877214]

OP here.
I would also recommend The Brothers Karamazov.
Any other suggestions?

[Anonymous No.2877238]

When I was in 10th grade or so I discovered Hermann Hesse and it opened up a world of theological study to me. Being raised Catholic, I found I was unhappy in my religion in a number of ways and Hesse showed a different way (to a young kid at least) to look at the world. He's sort of entry-level obviously... a step to Kafka and Dostoevsky and so on.

[Anonymous No.2877242]

>What are some books you would highly recommend to an intelligent young person?
>I'm 18 and a week away from going to college

[Anonymous No.2877245]

>>2877238
Almost forgot, Alan Watts as well.

[Anonymous No.2877248]

From what perspective? To learn about literature? To learn about morality? To learn about oneself? To learn about everyone else? It gets recommended a lot here, but I think No Longer Human made me more aware of the people around me, even though I disagreed with what Dazai seemed to be saying quite a bit at the time.

[Anonymous No.2877282]

>>2877248
what is the point of learning about morality if it leads to moral nihilism?

[Anonymous No.2877290]

>>2877282
I wanted to know what OP was getting at so I could help his narcissistic self.

[Anonymous No.2877300]

College for Dummies

[Anonymous No.2877318]

>>2877290
I don't know what about my post made me sound narcissistic. Was it because I implied that I think I'm intelligent? If I'm going out of my way to read books as a teenager I could be called "intelligent."

>>2877248
All of those things I suppose. In general, books that are accessible enough for a relatively inexperienced reader and can open his mind to new possibilities and to self-knowledge. Sorry if that sounds vague.

[Anonymous No.2877334]

The earlier you read Thus Spake Zarathustra the better.

I say this both because it is a superbly written work of philosophy, and because his ideas have been considered and dealt with for awhile, even though many still think him to be "cutting edge."

[Anonymous No.2877353]

>>2877334
Is it worth reading if you have virtually no experience with philosophy?

[Anonymous No.2877362]

>>2877353
Yes, definitely. It's accessibility is part of why it's endured.

[Anonymous No.2877361]

>>2877071

I was reading animal farm and brave new world around then. those changed my life forever.

[Anonymous No.2877391]

>>2877318
You sounded narcissistic because you feel the books an intelligent teenager "should" read are any different from the books any teenager "should" read.

[Anonymous No.2877514]

>>2877391
I don't expect "any teenager" to pick up a book in this day and age. By "intelligent teenager" I just mean someone who is motivated and interested enough to read of his own accord and to get something valuable out of it.

[Anonymous No.2877550]

I learned about Op's book from catcher in the rye. It's mentioned by Holden Caulfield as one of the books he liked to read.

Is that where Op first heard of it?

[Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf No.2877554]

If you're interested at all in politics, economics, or liberteh...

Instead of a Book, By a Man Too Busy to Write One - Benjamin Tucker

The Homebrew Industrial Revolution - Kevin Carson

Studies In Mutualist Political Economy - Kevin Carson

Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution - Peter Kropotkin

And, although I'll get shit for it....

The Ego and Its Own - Max Stirner

[Anonymous No.2877574]

>>2877554
your attempt to lure OP into anarchism, while praiseworthy, shouldn't be so cryptic

just tell him you're trying to convert him to anarchism

right now it's just like, "hey, i'm going to give you this bible. it's a good book, read it. you don't have to believe it or anything, you can take it or leave it as you like. i'm not trying to convert you as a priest, trust me."

[Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf No.2877591]

>>2877574

He asked for books that had a great impact on me. Those books did. I think they're worth reading whether you want to actively consider the Anarchist position or not, because they, at the very least, give you a frame of reference.

[Anonymous No.2877592]

>>2877554
>biological determinism

[Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf No.2877615]

>>2877592

>implying morality isn't the product of evolutionary biology and psychology

[Anonymous No.2877629]

>>2877615
>implying i wont rebel because of that
>implying evo psych is any way scientific or human empowering
>implying intellectuals aren't a bunch of weak willed immoral passive sociopaths
>implying your beliefs don't result in nihilism
>which makes anarchism stupid and pointless and everything else stupid
>slit your throat and not even feel a thing now because of your beliefs you will regret this
>implying hard determinism is true
>implying you wont piss some body off with these kind of beliefs to where they destroy you

[Anonymous No.2877642]

>>2877629
LOL, so edgy.

[Anonymous No.2877655]

>>2877642
I will become rage personified.

[Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf No.2877661]

>>2877629

>implying i wont rebel because of that

You certainly could, but you'd get your shit slapped by everybody else who thinks that force is legitimate in response to its initiation. I'm a Consequentialist, bro - do what you want as long as it benefits you.

>implying evo psych is any way scientific or human empowering

Evolution by natural selection is fantastic at explaining the advent of morality and human cooperation.

>implying intellectuals aren't a bunch of weak willed immoral passive sociopaths

Define "immoral."

>implying your beliefs don't result in nihilism

Consequentialism can certainly be closely linked to Nihilism.

>which makes anarchism stupid and pointless and everything else stupid

No, it just means that nothing has inherent value in and of itself.

>slit your throat and not even feel a thing now because of your beliefs you will regret this

But I really enjoy being alive....

>implying hard determinism is true

No I'm not. I never said anything of the sort.

>implying you wont piss some body off with these kind of beliefs to where they destroy you

The government would probably be the institution most offended by my beliefs and they have bigger fish to fry than an Anarchist posting on one of 4chan's slowest boards.

[Anonymous No.2877686]

>>2877629
>>2877629
You are the worst thing that has ever happened to anything every.

I made this value judgment through omniscience

[Anonymous No.2877696]

>>2877661
>You certainly could, but you'd get your shit slapped by everybody else who thinks that force is legitimate in response to its initiation. I'm a Consequentialist, bro - do what you want as long as it benefits you.

Lets say I could get away with raping and killing a child. There is a 100% certainty that I will get away with it and I have a great desire to do so. Should I do it?

>But I really enjoy being alive....
You ruined my chance at empathy when you spouted your nihilistic beliefs. You are now no more than object and only oblivion awaits.

[Anonymous No.2877704]

Memories of the Future by Sigizmund Krzhizhanovsky

It's a collection of short stories.

[Anonymous No.2877719]

>>2877661
evo psych fails though, because morality is so divergent

if anything, entrenched systems of morality have caused mutual destruction from world wars

[Anonymous No.2877725]

Jitterbug Perfume - Tom Robbins Breakfast of Champions - Kurt Vonnegut Read to entertain yourself. Thinking sucks.

[Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf No.2877730]

>>2877696

>Lets say I could get away with raping and killing a child. There is a 100% certainty that I will get away with it and I have a great desire to do so. Should I do it?

From a purely Stirnirian standpoint? The subjective disutility of the effort needed to pull this off to perfection to ensure that no one would ever ever ever ever ever know probably exceeds what little benefit you receive from it.

From my standpoint? I, unlike Stirner, think that morality should be factored in to the consequences that you consider. You might feel empathy towards her. You might feel guilty as shit afterwards. You might suffer from paranoia. And ultimately, because morality is framed in reality, we can hardly consider a thought experiment in which you know absolutely that you will never be caught, because in reality, there is always that chance.

>You ruined my chance at empathy when you spouted your nihilistic beliefs. You are now no more than object and only oblivion awaits.

Okay. I'll continue deriving subjective value from my life while you continue to be buttmad.

[moloko !!LTz0qEPBnal No.2877732]

Hey, I just started reading this too OP.

[Anonymous No.2877738]

>>2877730
Great, you skipped around the question.
You are weak and subjectivity will never be practical on a large scale and therefore is wrong.

might is right, deal with it

[Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf No.2877740]

>>2877719

>evo psych fails though, because morality is so divergent

Morality is divergent in extraneous scenarios. Because morality evolved as an evolutionary survival mechanism, it becomes pointless in situations when going against morality directly contributes to your survival. For example, most people think that stealing shit is wrong. If I were to, say, be a starving beggar, though, and happen across a windowsill with a pie on it, I might steal that pie because it's a matter of survival, and I probably wouldn't feel bad about it. Morality is not absolute, but it is commonly present.

[Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf No.2877746]

>>2877738

>might is right, deal with it

Did you miss the part where I referred to myself as a rather Stirnirian Consequentialist? Might, ultimately, is the only natural right. It just so happens, though, that in many situations, aggression for short term game is in opposition to your long term self interest.

[Anonymous No.2877749]

>>2877740
Why can't you just axiomatize your morality

If you do so carefully enough you can account for every sort of situation.

Even if it's impractical to do so, the fact that it's theoretically possible to give an axiomatization shows that it's not as arbitrary as you make it out to be

[Anonymous No.2877753]

>>2877746
Who cares about my self-interest.

you're weak and passive

[Anonymous No.2877758]

>>2877740
i don't think this is true, that it only happens in "extraneous" instances

morality has been central to human conflict in the last two centuries

eg: wwi, wwii, terrorism, communism vs capitalism, etc

[Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf No.2877763]

>>2877749

Don't get me wrong, I don't think that morality is arbitrary, and I often refer to it axiomatically in the Non-Aggression Principle. I just happen to recognize that it is an evolutionary mechanic derived through the desire of each individual to maximize the satisfaction of his or her own self interest.

Think of it this way - pain is the evolutionary mechanism which allows us to quickly and intuitively interact with our environment. I COULD rationally think through the biological consequences of putting my hand in a fire every time I see one and avoid it through logic, or I could just recognize that putting my hand in a fire hurts like shit. Morality is the evolutionary mechanism that allows us to intuitively interact with each other. I COULD rationally consider the consequences of stealing my neighbor's apple, like him defending it, me being socially ostracized, or the subsequent investigation into my crime, or I could simply feel empathy for my neighbor and realize that if I stole his apple I would feel guilty.

[Anonymous No.2877768]

>>2877758
how was morality central to WWI

[Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf No.2877771]

>>2877758

>eg: wwi, wwii, terrorism, communism vs capitalism, etc

Ah, but I'm speaking from an Anarchist's perspective. WWI and WWII were the products of the State, which creates many other extraneous conditions besides. Terrorism is often a reactionary blowback to State intervention. State controlled Capitalism created the conditions that the Communists so opposed. Ultimately, just like the source of most scarcity rents in economics is the State, so is it the source of many of the extraneous conditions that test peoples' morality.

[Anonymous No.2877781]

>>2877550
That wasn't where I heard about Of Human Bondage. Actually, I read Catcher in the Rye just about a week ago (I would have read it sooner by I couldn't find a copy), and, knowing that I planned to read Of Human Bondage next, I thought it was pretty cool to see it mentioned.

Oh look, my thread turned into shit. Oh well.

[Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf No.2877797]

>>2877781

Yeah, sorry for diverting it away. At least I mentioned some perspective changing books in my life, I suppose.

[Anonymous No.2877808]

>>2877797
Thanks.

[Anonymous No.2877811]

>>2877797
>saying sorry

hypocrite

[Anonymous No.2878009]

>>2877214
I wish I'd read that and Anna Karenina. I'd add the books of Proverbs and Job (the latter to show that sometimes life isn't fair and when it isn't your friends probably won't understand). James if you're a Christian.