/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.4147218]

Why do post-modern writers want us to reject theism, objective morals and decency and replace them with atheism, nihilism, degeneracy and existential angst?

Could this be a deliberate attempt to undermine Western values by a certain minority of writers and philosophers?

[Anonymous No.4147227]

They don't.

http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/en/heartfield-james.htm

Also if you're an Odinist and you think "Western values" are worth defending I think you're really confused.

[Anonymous No.4147229]

>>4147218
Fuck off Varg and take your retarded theories somewhere else.

[Anonymous No.4147235]

>>4147227
>Also if you're an Odinist and you think "Western values" are worth defending I think you're really confused.

How do you figure?

[sMk !ArcH9WpopA No.4147236]

Because morals are not objective.

[Anonymous No.4147237]

>implying serious writers can have any effect at all on our world
big lel. people can't be affected by things no one reads

[Anonymous No.4147238]

Yes, it is. Congratulations, you're the first person who has ever come upon this idea and you're brilliant epiphany has caused the bad people who for the past century have plotted against you and everyone you think is good and right to recoil in terror knowing that their evil plan has been found out. Their tentacles are withdrawing from the land as they are pulled into the twisting nether from which they came and God's light is beginning to flood the world with its warm magnificence. Throughout the nations of the earth the people are gathering in celebration to commemorate the valiant actions of the brave young hero who had the courage to make a masterful insight on the Internet and save us all from the tyranny of the bad, bad people. I thank you, noble warrior, and offer you the kingdoms of the world so that they may forever be ruled by your just and wise hand. Your beautiful queen is awaiting, young one! Come, assume your rightful place at the throne!

[Anonymous No.4147241]

I recommend the 'Havamal'. It's a good read and insight

http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/havamal.html#men

[Anonymous No.4147246]

Western values.

[Anonymous No.4147250]

>>4147238
wow r u bein ironic LOL

spoiler/spoiler clever 1 m8 spoiler/spoiler

;)

[Anonymous No.4147255]

>>4147237
But serious writers have always had an effect on the world.

[Anonymous No.4147256]

>>4147238

right back at you, friendo

[Anonymous No.4147258]

>>4147218

[Anonymous No.4147259]

>>4147235
Western values are Christian values. The concept of 'the West' as it is was unknown to the Norse, anyway. I doubt the Norse whose traditions were violently displaced felt any racial or national sympathy with Christian colonizers simply because they were from the same continent.

[Anonymous No.4147262]

>>4147250
Are you being ironic?

[Anonymous No.4147264]

>>4147218
Ever since the 1990s or so, there's been sort of a backlash against this kind of thought. IJ, for instance, is heavily opposed to irony for its own sake and the "hip cynicism" that had come to define the literature scene. This post would've been spot-on in the 70's and 80's, but we're starting to move away from that.

[Fandroid !p6ktXMpsfc No.4147276]

Stop living in the past. You're not a fucking viking.

>objective morals

[Anonymous No.4147279]

>>4147218
You clearly don't read. Why are you here?

[Anonymous No.4147286]

>>4147218
Because of the lack of better or reasonable alternatives.

[Anonymous No.4147292]

>>4147264
>This post would've been spot-on in the 70's and 80'

No. It wouldn't have. Please stop using postmodernism as a scapegoat label for everything you think is wrong with society and crack open the fucking books. Most of the authors you could describe as postmodern were analyzing and discussing conditions that already existed (moral relativism, atheism, nihilism), not championing them.

Like, some of you think Derrida actually invented Tumblr or something.

[Anonymous No.4147298]

>>4147259

Christian values have their place here.

But lets not pretend that Christianity had a monopoly on ethics at any point in its history.

The Europeans prior to being converted understood ethics and politics, had art and architecture, and were very sophisticated and wise people. They actually bathed regularly, a practice most christians neglected.

Don't believe the idea of the savage barbarian. It's bad history

[Anonymous No.4147302]

>>4147292
I didn't mean spot-on, I mean relatively relevant. My bad.

[Anonymous No.4147314]

>>4147264
>Ever since the 1990s or so, there's been sort of a backlash against this kind of thought. IJ, for instance, is heavily opposed to irony for its own sake and the "hip cynicism" that had come to define the literature scene.

You haven't actually studied any of this stuff beyond Wikipedia articles

[Anonymous No.4147327]

>>4147258

OP has a point it seems. No?

[Anonymous No.4147331]

>>4147314
No, I didn't do my thesis on it. What are your opinions and qualifications?

[Anonymous No.4147361]

atheism leads to nihilism and degeneracy? this is what Nietzsche and many writers have argued

[Anonymous No.4147409]

objective morals don't mean they are floating in space waiting to be discovered

they are still subjective values but you hold them and treat them as concrete things, as if they were objective.

[Anonymous No.4147419]

>>4147409
can't call it objective, then. needs a new term like "rigid subjectivity" or something.

[Anonymous No.4147426]

>>4147218

It's because they act like teenagers. They don't realise it.

You try to unravel and deconstruct your parents/society until you understand how it works and why it's important to sustain it and how it's up to you.

These retards still think someone else will do it for them.

>they've never grown up

[Anonymous No.4147438]

>>4147426
What an abortion of a post.

[Anonymous No.4147451]

>>4147426
>they've never grown up

Believing yourself to be mature is quintessential to immaturity, listen to children and teenagers make absurd arguments about how grown up they are it's like listening to conservatives talk, for gods sake.

[Anonymous No.4147456]

>>4147426
This makes sense

>>4147438

please be edgy somewhere else

[Anonymous No.4147458]

>>4147218
Honesty and truthfulness. It's the most dangerous virtue, since you'll end up with nothing if you follow it to the end. All those other values you mention can't exist today unless you have a deliberate will to untruth. Which is immoral according to the very value systems you prefer.

The old values are pretty nice but they are dead because they have become incompatible with themselves because of what we know.

[Anonymous No.4147465]

>>4147458

>truth leads to nihilism

No it doesn't, you just need to be more nuanced with the truth.

[Anonymous No.4147469]

>>4147237
All it takes is one person to read your work if he has a large enough impact on the world.

[Fandroid !p6ktXMpsfc No.4147474]

>>4147465
nihilism isn't some big scary thing. It just means nothing is objectively true because you don't objectively know everything, therefore you make up your meaning to life.

[Anonymous No.4147476]

>>4147237
Karl Marx and Upton Sinclair are two I can think of off the top of my head.

[Anonymous No.4147487]

>>4147456
>please be edgy somewhere else

His post was fucking garbage. Another shitpost by a self-important fatass who doesn't actually read. If your critique of an entire method of inquiry rests on the premise of "they act like teenagers, they just don't realize how it works" you deserve to have your post called out for the Youtube-tier abortion that it is.

[Anonymous No.4147501]

>>4147487

What part of be edgy somewhere else did you not understand?

[Anonymous No.4147506]

>>4147218
>postmodern
>atheist

Every Pomo fag I've talked to has been some kind of spiritualist or multicultural religious enthusiast. Atheism seems to be confined to analytic circles.

[Anonymous No.4147514]

>>4147501
Just clearing things up before I leave so that nobody actually thinks that post wasn't a complete anti-intellectual abortion.

[Anonymous No.4147524]

>>4147298
Agreed. Christianity took most of its ethics from Aristotle, Plato and the Stoics. If you think about it the Bible isn't that rich of a source for ethical discourse. Even if the OT laws were meant to be broadly applied to goyim Christians, most of them are arbitrary (cutting dicks, wearing yarmulkes, etc.).

[Anonymous No.4147533]

>>4147419
Is mathematics 'subjective' then? Let's not mess around with terms. Just because you wish to treat divine command morality as the only form of objective morality doesn't make it so.

[Anonymous No.4147537]

>>4147259
>what is aesirian code

[Anonymous No.4147540]

>>4147524
>If you think about it the Bible isn't that rich of a source for ethical discourse

Very true. In fact it is quite unethical until jesus came and tried to reform the jews, and even then his discourse was really limited.

It was the church fathers, st augustine, and the rest who tried to flesh out ethics, ironically by looking back to Plato and Aristotle for help...

[Anonymous No.4147543]

>>4147474
Fandroid, you are so fucking retarded. Please read some philosophy first-hand and stop spouting absolute misinformation such as this post you dumb fucking nuisance

[Anonymous No.4147553]

>>4147465
No, but the desire for truth, if approached honestly and sternly, leads to a large degree of scepticism. Which makes the adaptation of values a mostly arbitrary endeavour and leads to a lack of strong convictions.

[Anonymous No.4147555]

>>4147474
Nihilism doesn't allow for making up your own meaning. Nihilism states that doing so is impossible.

[Anonymous No.4147569]

>>4147533
Mathematical propositions are proved by logical arguments which remain consistent and independent of interpretative ambiguity. They are either right or wrong. Objective.

[Anonymous No.4147578]

>>4147501
>Person sincerely defends pomo in an anti-pomo thread
>Gets rebuked for being "edgy" i.e. sincere

tfw the anti-pomo people are the most pomo people itt

[Anonymous No.4147580]

IMO nihilism follows directly from Christianity. Once we enter the post Christian era we come to realize that our values aren't emanations from heaven, but something deeply human. The nihilist is one who has been struck dumb by the former realization: that there is no divine realm where are values are floating around existing separately from our understanding. The cure for nihilism is obvious: throw out all of the medieval superfluous notions and continue onward with a scientific and curious mind.

There is a firm basis for morality in the human experience itself; no divine realm is required.

[Anonymous No.4147590]

>>4147569

>Mathematical propositions are proved by logical arguments

How are maths proven? Oh let me check this paper and use my reasoning to figure out if its true...oh good thing humans are infallible!

Oh wait, where is the proof that logic ever reaches anything resembling truth?

[Fandroid !p6ktXMpsfc No.4147588]

>>4147555
>>4147543

read a book.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existential_nihilism

[Anonymous No.4147593]

>>4147580
>The cure for nihilism is obvious: throw out all of the medieval superfluous notions and continue onward with a scientific and curious mind.

So our ancestors were right when they embraced their humanity and felt as part of the natural world? While the Christians thought wrong when they saw themselves as strangers in a strangeland, as some sort of cartoon characters placed into a world by a Sky God

this makes sense actually. The christian ist he one who goes through existential crises when he realizes his human goals, ethics and values are just that -- human desires and values -- and not magical injunctions created by a divine mind.

[Anonymous No.4147594]

>>4147569

Agreed. They also depend on a rational interpreter (a human). Objectivity should not be determined in an exclusively medieval metaphysical sense when it comes to morals. Morality is a part of the 'subjective' human experience as much as logic is.

Meta-ethics is probably the beginning of this realization.

[Anonymous No.4147600]

>>4147593
I wouldn't make too many generalizations. Christianity transferred and cultivated a lot of the thought at would produce the enlightenment and the modern era. We were born of Christendom, but Christendom was also born of pre-Christian Europe.

[Anonymous No.4147605]

>>4147588
>read a book
>links to a fucking wikipedia article

Wikipedia is retarded, and nihilism encompasses more than its existential facet

[Anonymous No.4147610]

What a terrifyingly oppressive way to understand art. As if art comes from a place of lechery and manipulation, that is trying to turn you away from the true path. I mean, Plato would have agreed with you, but literary criticism has come pretty far in the last ~2400 years. Art is outside both the writer and the reader. The way you read a book informs the text just as much as the writer does. Looking at a writer like Balzac or Tolstoy or Brecht is a great example of three people with very deliberate moral/political intentions, that made something else entirely. Tolstoy renounced all of his books because they were basically just too good. Nobody gives a fuck about pedantic writings anymore, and that's because it sucks. All the best works to come out of societies that try to manipulate art for moral/political reasons (i.e. early America/USSR) end up being banned or disavowed. Art is discursive, by its very nature.

[Anonymous No.4147613]

Nihilism is not a real thing. "Subjective" and "objective" are terrible terms. Read Descartes, then Kant, then Nietzsche. It's all there.

[Anonymous No.4147617]

>>4147600
>but Christendom was also born of pre-Christian Europe.

pretty sure it was born of pre-christian jewish hebrew traditions and desert myths.

not really european at all.

[Anonymous No.4147620]

>>4147610

why the random copy/pasta?

[Anonymous No.4147625]

>>4147620
what

[Anonymous No.4147639]

>>4147588
If one does allow for meaning it's called existentialism. You can't claim nihilism as a label for something opposed to it, no matter how much you like how cool it sounds. If any meaning might be possible you're a filthy pied-noir, a skew-eyed midget or a hunchbacked Dane.

[Anonymous No.4147640]

>>4147617

Hellenized Judaism produced Christianity. Plato was a major influence on Jewish mysticism. Once again, we cannot make broad generalizations and I would wager to say that Christianity is in whole more Hellenic than specifically Jewish. My opinion here is not something entirely unique and is shared by factions of classicists and even Catholics. (Hellenism vs. Hebraism in catholic thought).

[Anonymous No.4147645]

>>4147590

Truth is contained within the system and its foundational axioms. One plus one is always two.

[Anonymous No.4147654]

>>4147645
Not with my system and its foundational axioms, baby. And they're just as arbitrary as the conventional ones.

[Anonymous No.4147673]

>>4147640
>Hellenized Judaism produced Christianity.

This is a huge overstatement and exaggeration.
And regardless, it doesn't negate the fact that Christianity has a jewish foundation.

Paul went around converting 'hellenized jews' to his branch of christianity, which was just another jewish cult really.

>Plato was a major influence on Jewish mysticism.

Irrelevant. The truth may influence crazy cults now and then.

[Anonymous No.4147675]

>>4147654
If you want to communicate in English en you follow the rules of its grammar. If you want to communicate in logic then you follow its 'grammar'. You may have some individualistic subjective notion in your head, but it's useless to me as I cannot share it with you.

I challenge you to make the statement '1+1=2' in an equally coherent manner.

[Anonymous No.4147692]

>>4147675

simply stating it isn't a proof.

>>4147645

and what does this gibberish even mean? axioms are arbitrary and taken on pure faith. nothing else.

[Anonymous No.4147690]

>>4147675
I was talking about truthfulness, not about successful communication. The two have nothing in common and you shouldn't mistake comprehensibility for having any value outside of itself. 1+1=2 isn't true because you and your neighbour agree on it.

[Anonymous No.4147711]

>>4147690
So coherence isn't truth? It's false?

We do things to communicate. Truth only has any meaning inasmuch as it is understood between us. 1+1=2 is true because it is an effective communication of a concept.

[Anonymous No.4147721]

>>4147692
>arbitrary

No one uses his word correctly.

[Anonymous No.4147727]

>>4147711

lies have to be communicated effectively in order to be believed.

coherence and truth are two different things

[Anonymous No.4147746]

>>4147727

Lies are lies inasmuch as they are not effectively examined. Logic examines and communicates thereby producing coherence and truth.

[Anonymous No.4147760]

>>4147746
You can make a coherent lie you dunce.

[Anonymous No.4147768]

>>4147711
>So coherence isn't truth? It's false?
It's neither. Just like warm is neither black nor white.

>We do things to communicate.
Nice completely arbitrary assumption. Fuck power, humanity is driven by the Will to Communicate!

>Truth only has any meaning inasmuch as it is understood between us.
For you maybe. Truth has meaning for me inasmuch as it is understood by me. You don't enter the equation.

>1+1=2 is true because it is an effective communication of a concept.
According to that logic every statement can be said to be true as long as you assume that it means the same to the other party which makes the whole assumption arbitrary.

[Anonymous No.4147769]

>>4147760
You're being poetic. Define your terms and please refrain from personal insults.

[Anonymous No.4147775]

>>4147746

>Lies are lies inasmuch as they are not effectively examined.

in order for a proposition to be judged "false" it must be coherent and apprehended, otherwise it remains incoherent and indeterminate.

>Logic examines and communicates thereby producing coherence and truth.

logic only implies a cognitive necessity between ideas, a tautology, a truth by definition, it doesn't do anything else, and we have no way to tell if it leads to truth.

[Anonymous No.4147786]

>>4147769
Ok mr custodian of board culture. By coherence I mean the ability to fit into a system of predefined axioms, by lie I mean being deceitful while knowing the actual facts or truth. My point is you can build a lie that is coherent with the axioms of the system at hand.

Happy?

[Anonymous No.4147796]

This guy >>4147769 is one of the biggest idiots I've seen on /lit/

[Anonymous No.4147804]

>>4147796
He sounds like some one who has read a few pages of Wittgenstein and is so eager to apply it he doesn't quite have any idea what he's talking about.

[Anonymous No.4147810]

>>4147804
>He sounds like some one who has read a few pages of Spark Notes and not understood any of it

fixd

[Anonymous No.4147813]

>>4147768
Why are you posting? To communicate with me. That is axiomatic. I couldn't hope to determine any other motive you have unless you communicate it to me explicitly or tacitly.

>Truth is what I understand

And how do you understand anything? You possess language and logic cultivated by almost anyone other than you. If I took you and raised you in isolation since birth you would be as dumb as animal. The truth is something inexpressible unless it can be expressed and a thing cannot be and not-be at once. With the ability to express truth through coherent means comes the contingency of truth upon those means if it is to be expressed or communicated.

[Anonymous No.4147825]

>>4147813
>Why are you posting? To communicate with me.
>That is axiomatic.
Given how much you emphasize communication, I find it ironic how you are unable to understand someone outside of your little world.

[Anonymous No.4147828]

>>4147813
>Why are you posting? To communicate with me. That is axiomatic

You say this as if it actually means something.
Hilarious

[Anonymous No.4147830]

>>4147786

Coherent to you. To be coherent to another it must cease to be a lie.

>>4147796

Contribute or don't, but insults are unnessecary.

>>4147804

Cry some more or stop projecting. One is entertaining for me while the other is beneficial for you. Choices, choices... What to do?

[Anonymous No.4147843]

>>4147830
>Coherent to you. To be coherent to another it must cease to be a lie.

Not if the lie is under the same axioms, like if we're both Christians and I lie about having Jesus whispering divine revelation gently into my ear. When in reality I just want to seem interesting.

[Anonymous No.4147858]

>>4147843
Just because the reasons for a lie are coherent does not mean the lie is. The lie is by definition an act of sabotage and deception, so I don't know why we are still discussing lies.

[Anonymous No.4147859]

>>4147613
>"Subjective" and "objective" are terrible terms.

I'm starting to agree.

[Anonymous No.4147862]

>>4147858

There are different types of lies. Examination of a lie about reality, nature, real events takes empirical consideration, something extra-logical.

you can't deduce a proposition is a lie by simply looking at its grammatical or logical structure.

please stop speaking you're embarrassing yourself

[Anonymous No.4147877]

>>4147813
>Why are you posting? To communicate with me. That is axiomatic. I couldn't hope to determine any other motive you have unless you communicate it to me explicitly or tacitly.
How would my posting to communicate validate your strange notion that truth is that which can be communicated? Yes, people type things on the internet to communicate. No, this doesn't mean that "people do things to communicate" in general. The two have nothing to do with each other. For someone who values logic you are curiously deprived of it.

>And how do you understand anything?
I don't.

>You possess language and logic cultivated by almost anyone other than you.
Yes.

>If I took you and raised you in isolation since birth you would be as dumb as animal.
I would be dead.

>The truth is something inexpressible unless it can be expressed
And an anus is something unfuckable unless it can be fucked.

>and a thing cannot be and not-be at once.
Being and non-being are a false dichotomy.

>With the ability to express truth through coherent means comes the contingency of truth upon those means if it is to be expressed or communicated.
Except that ability doesn't come at all, so nothing comes with it.

[Anonymous No.4147879]

>tfw writing a Socratic dialogue lifted directly from /lit/ philosophy threads.

I'm gonna be rich.

[Anonymous No.4147884]

>>4147879
Would buy.

[Anonymous No.4147889]

>>4147879
Would you like a cup of herbal tea?

[Anonymous No.4147892]

>>4147877

>the ability doesn't come

Why is there a word 'truth' then if it represents nothing?

[Anonymous No.4147897]

>>4147892
I never said the concept doesn't represent anything. Just because I can say 'unicorn' doesn't mean I can ride one.

[Anonymous No.4147902]

>>4147892
checkmate atheists

[Anonymous No.4147908]

>>4147892
Why is there a word 'nothing' then if it represents nothing?

[Anonymous No.4147910]

>>4147879
lel
>"My dear Anon, you must agree then, that this characterized greentext summary of your opinion I have provided does not accord to reason."
>"By Zeus, my admirable Anon, as regards this indictment, it is most important instead to present this characterized greentext summary of YOUR opinion, accompanied with suitable reaction image."

[Anonymous No.4147913]

what a weird thread

[Anonymous No.4147918]

>>4147879
>>4147910
Actually this kind of chaotic banter probably approaches the way the Ancients went at it more than any contemporary academic debate.

[Anonymous No.4147919]

>>4147897
Then what do you mean by 'truth'? Either something inexpressible derived from empirical experience or something expressible which articulates that which was formerly inexpressible. The former definition is completely useless and if we look at the second defnition then what are we expressing? What are we doing to that which was inexpressible? We are making coherent statements or something else?

[Anonymous No.4147930]

>>4147918
When you construct how something ought to be done and build an institution around that ought, you ruin it.

[Anonymous No.4147939]

I do remember something about how because a lie involves saying something happened that didnt/ backwards, if you lay out all the facts the lie won't fit. But most of us don't have all the facts when we're lied to, so the in congruence isn't noticeable.

[Anonymous No.4147943]

>>4147919
>Either something inexpressible derived from empirical experience or something expressible which articulates that which was formerly inexpressible. The former definition is completely useless
For me it's very useful to have a concept for something incommunicable. I don't merely use language as a means of communication.

[Anonymous No.4147966]

>>4147943

wow edgy locust, who does he think he is?

[Anonymous No.4147977]

>>4147966
It is the overlocust looking with disgust upon the last locusts.

[Anonymous No.4147983]

>>4147966
Schopenhopper.

[Anonymous No.4147992]

>>4147983
>Schopenhopper.

heheh

[Anonymous No.4147993]

>>4147943
>2/10
>Too crowded.
>Wouldn't join.

[Anonymous No.4148192]

help

[Anonymous No.4148240]

>>4147830

>Just because the reasons for a lie are coherent does not mean the lie is

Pls stahp

[Anonymous No.4148301]

>>4148240

No u

[Anonymous No.4149165]

>math/ logic is subjective
Listen retards, maths is merely an extension of language with all its assumptions. "All bachelors are single" isn't a subjective opinion. It's an objective tautology, unless you are wilfully retarded and trying to fail at language comprehension. Logic is already fucking built into your language. If you disagree with it you've chosen to fail at communication.

Stop retreating into ignorance and get over your solipsistic ass. You will have to make sense of this world and contribute to it one day, unless you're a loser.

[Anonymous No.4149804]

>>4149165

Something can be subjectively logical you dumb piece of shit.

[Anonymous No.4149832]

>>4147553
>a large degree of scepticism. Which makes the adaptation of values a mostly arbitrary endeavour
That's where ya blew it.
>All those other values you mention can't exist today unless you have a deliberate will to untruth.
But you already blew it here anyway.

[Anonymous No.4149833]

>>4147438
Yes, your shitpost was an abortion.

[Anonymous No.4150019]

>>4149832

How did he blow it? That's a perfectly reasonable and cogent point. Offer a refutation or quit being a shit smearing dilettante.

[Anonymous No.4150042]

>>4149165
>Listen retards, maths is merely an extension of language with all its assumptions
Yes, so elaborate grunting between agents that works out reasonable if the task at hand is simple enough.

>"All bachelors are single" isn't a subjective opinion. It's an objective tautology, unless you are wilfully retarded and trying to fail at language comprehension.
Those linguistic conventions aren't 'objective'.

>Logic is already fucking built into your language. If you disagree with it you've chosen to fail at communication.
Logic is a language and other languages are compatible with it to a degree.

>Stop retreating into ignorance and get over your solipsistic ass. You will have to make sense of this world and contribute to it one day, unless you're a loser.

>muh pragmatic worldview
>300k starting
>being productive

Your kind is the worst. You lose your patience once things get complex so you throw a tantrum because the mean people question things in a a way that prohibits you from 'getting things done'. You'd build a house on sand because driving the foundation pools into rock is just too much trouble.

[Anonymous No.4150045]

>>4149165
>Listen retards, maths is merely an extension of language with all its assumptions
Yes, so elaborate grunting between agents that works out reasonable if the task at hand is simple enough.

>"All bachelors are single" isn't a subjective opinion. It's an objective tautology, unless you are wilfully retarded and trying to fail at language comprehension.
Those linguistic conventions aren't 'objective'.

>Logic is already fucking built into your language. If you disagree with it you've chosen to fail at communication.
Logic is a language and other languages are compatible with it to a degree.

>Stop retreating into ignorance and get over your solipsistic ass. You will have to make sense of this world and contribute to it one day, unless you're a loser.

>muh pragmatic worldview
>300k starting
>being productive

Your kind is the worst. You lose your patience once things get complex so you throw a tantrum because the mean people question things in a way that prohibits you from 'getting things done'. You'd build a house on sand because driving the foundation poles into rock is just too much trouble.

[Anonymous No.4150059]

>>4147218
I think it's because we live in an age where technology and science is rampant, to the point that it's excessive, and we associate, given history to look at, religion as cruelty and ignorance. It is, and isn't, but writing it off as gibberish is the quickest way to assure people how intelligent and enlightened you are about how the world works.
It's the Longchamp bag of intellectuals. It doesn't make you high class, but a lot of middle class people think so.

[Anonymous No.4150064]

>debate about objectivity
IT IS HAPPENING AGAIN

[Anonymous No.4150076]

>>4147227


correction, after ww2 they realized that western liberal capitalism had changed since marxes time and was delivering material promises better than alternatives heretofore, and belatedly came to the conclusion that the more fundamental crisis was, how to say, 'spiritual', not material (adorno, horkheimer, and marcuse specifically, though their latest works reflecting this turn were very pessimistic regarding the prospects of countervailing the adaptive and synthetic capacity of capitalist cultural hegemony, likely because they ruled certain concepts or ideals out a priori due to their convictions).

[Anonymous No.4150319]

just turn to aristotle

[Anonymous No.4150425]

can we discuss how liberals and multiculturalism are the real problems polluting literature, and literary studies?

Harold Bloom was 100% right about this.

[Anonymous No.4150428]

>>4150425
>liberals
Yes.
>multiculturalism
I think the form of multiculturalism that gets on your nerves is a side effect of the commodification of culture, where you can buy a dream catcher on the side of the road along with a little slip of paper that explains "what it means" (completely out of cultural context, half-assedly) for example, or where a poem about how hard farmers work can be used to sell pickup trucks to non-farmers to make them feel special, and other such bullshit.

[Anonymous No.4151030]

Because you're a faggot.

[Anonymous No.4151884]

>>4150019
Oh look, another babby.

>a large degree of skepticism makes the adaptation of of values an arbitrary endeavour
Non sequitur fallacy.

>All those other values you mention can't exist today unless you have a deliberate will to untruth.
The same non sequitur fallacy.

Get smart.

[Anonymous No.4151887]

>>4150428
>I think the form of multiculturalism that gets on your nerves is a side effect of the commodification of culture, where you can buy a dream catcher on the side of the road
No, he probably means the form of multiculturalism that supports the influx of mass waves of third world trash, while also saying their their culture is perfectly equal and valid to the host culture, and thus deserves equal consideration and representation.

[Anonymous No.4152008]

>>4151884
Consistent scepticism leads to a degree of uncertainly where no belief can be said to be more likely than another belief. So there is no reason to act on one belief over the other. Making all decisions arbitrary. It's not that hard to grasp.

[Anonymous No.4152079]

I think you have it backwards, objective god-given morals are manipulative in nature as they are forms of social engineering (whether by god or humans), anything that questions them is amoral by (their) definition, but that's not exclusive of materialistic philosophies but any other that tries to establish a new set of values. It's all painfully obvious to anyone that isn't a religious fundamentalist or a frustrated dictator like Plato.

[Anonymous No.4153988]

If our society seems more nihilistic than that of previous eras, perhaps this is simply a sign of our maturity as a sentient species. As our collective consciousness expands beyond a crucial point, we are at last ready to accept life's fundamental truth: that life's only purpose is life itself.

Chairman Sheng-ji Yang
"Looking God in the Eye"

[Anonymous No.4154035]

>>4147419
that's also known as not being a pussy/susceptible to the questioning of retards

>think killing people is bad
>hey! morals aren't universal! what if adolf hitler you killed adolf hitler? check your anti-murder bigotry
>alright, killing isn't bad

[Anonymous No.4154039]

>>4147419
that's also known as not being a pussy/susceptible to the questioning of retards
>think killing people is bad
>hey! morals aren't universal! what if you killed adolf hitler? check your anti-murder bigotry
>alright, killing isn't bad

[Anonymous No.4155445]

>>4147690
Just wanted to chime in here: I'm a mathematician and I would say 1+1=2 because everyone agrees so.

[Anonymous No.4155459]

>>4147218
It isn't a conscious movement, but betamaxs that would shame and deny their true nature for the sake of social justice points. I see it happen every day.

[Anonymous No.4156039]

>>4147218
>thinking nihilism, degeneracy, existential angst and, most of all, sweet narcissism aren't the entire point of Western culture
atheism is merely filling the same old gaping hole with something other than god, which I suppose could be viewed as a refinement of Western culture viz my "quotation" above

[Anonymous No.4157881]

>>4147218
>Could this be a deliberate attempt to undermine Western values by a certain minority of writers and philosophers?
>West
>Values
Stupid barbarians can't into Boddhisatva.

[Anonymous No.4157883]

everyone should know by know that Western culture is the very cause of this, its Christian endpoint is this nihilism we're currently in, we have fulfilled our destiny-- this is a necessary outcome from the premises set by Christ

[Anonymous No.4157912]

Yes, it is deliberate, it's just another stage of the cultural war waged by jews against goyim since the dawn of their civilization.

>"Mozart, Pascal, Boolean algebra, Shakespeare, parliamentary government, baroque churches, Newton, the emancipation of women, Kant, Balanchine ballets, et al. don't redeem what this particular civilization has wrought upon the world. The white race is the cancer of human history."

SONTAG, Susan

That's the core of post-modernism.

[Anonymous No.4157926]

>atheism = postmodern

[Anonymous No.4157937]

>postmodern
>atheism
i dont think you get postmodernism

[Anonymous No.4157940]

>>4157912
/pol/ pls go

[Anonymous No.4157973]

>>4157912
sigh

[Anonymous No.4157978]

>>4157912
typical degenerate thinking his "arts" protect him from censure

you can't really reject post-modernism without rejecting the Enlightenment with it

[Anonymous No.4158032]

>>4157978
I'm ok with that. The Enlightment is a Judeo-Masonic attack on western civilization anyway.

[Anonymous No.4158049]

>>4158032
>rejecting Enlightenment
>debating here
4chan is essentially Enlightenment at it's most pure and unspoiled form. If you're against it, might as well fuck off

[Anonymous No.4158055]

>>4147218

They don't. They want you to define those things for yourself while realizing it's all pretty relative. There's no such thing as objective morality. Period.

>Degeneracy
Fuck off /pol/

[Anonymous No.4158061]

>>4152079

> think you have it backwards, objective god-given morals are manipulative in nature as they are forms of social engineering

This. God seemingly has a lot to say about specific legal policies and tax exemption status. I'd be very depressed if I found out that God was a bureaucrat.

[Anonymous No.4160206]

>>4158055
>only /pol/ uses the the word degeneracy
It's a word that has specific meaning,and it has relevance to OP's topic.