[ 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: 32 KB, 400x400, 1269216884100.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5243392 No.5243392[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

>pessimists are cowards who put in no risk and receive no reward
>pessimists have never felt the driving force of love which would throw their miserable internal world out of the window

>> No.5243396

I lol'd

>> No.5243401

>>5243392
I think the world is shit and I've been in love before. I was young, and she cheated on me with my best friend.

Your statement is wrong and you're going to rot in the ground with the rest of us.

>> No.5243403

>>5243392
>passive-aggressive mocking
>implying he's talking about himself in 3rd person.

>> No.5243428
File: 1.02 MB, 1437x1654, 1403305299202.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5243428

Daily reminder that optimists are the cause of most of the problems in the world since they severely underestimate the amount of suffering their actions bring forth.

>> No.5243446

Optimism is retardation in its crown form.

>> No.5243458

>>5243428
This seems true, but can you give an example?

>> No.5243460

>>5243458
They go outside more often.

>> No.5243471

>>5243460
No, I hate people immensely. The only human contact I have is with grocer clerks.

>> No.5243485

>>5243458
Having children. When optimists contemplate having children, they consider the scenario of a happy, beautiful child carelessly running around until he's old enough to do well in school and get a good job with which he's happy later. They never consider a dumb guy with a speech impediment working at McDonald's his whole life, a little girl dying of leukaemia or a paedophile. All these people envision these perfect little spawns and most are of course very much incorrect in their expectations.

>> No.5243486

Tbh there is a kind of pessimism that is manly and a kind of pessimism that is effeminate; and there is a kind of optimism that is manly and a kind of pessimism that is effeminate. It's not really about optimism vs. pessimism, it's about vanity vs. wisdom. There are kinds of sadness and kinds of happiness that are both equally vain, and it's this vain moods that people usually are bickering about when they argue optimism vs. pessimism, not realizing that they are both just really down to different sensual natures where one has pleasing vanities in his life and so is happy, and the other has displeasing vanities in his life and so is sad - but they are both vain. Then there is the kind of optimism/pessimism that is based on wisdom and experience.

tbh optimism vs. pessimism is fucking stupid, what people really are talking about is sanguine temperament vs. melancholy temperament.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_temperaments

>> No.5243493

>>5243471
Me too. I'm a pessimist and I avoid people like I avoid the plague. If I'm out in the pub or a bar or something with friends I can tolerate them, I don't mind, I'll talk to people because I'm relaxed.

When I have to wake up at 7 am, drive to some fucking stupid factory then deal with FUCKING RETARDS, that is when I have a problem.

What should I do?

>> No.5243494

>>5243486
Philosophical pessimism and being inclined to melancholy are different things though. You can be a cheerful pessimist and a sad optimist.

>> No.5243500

>>5243485
My exact thoughts, I am also a full antinatalist. I will never have kids, I've explained this to my girlfriend and she is confident that I will changed my mind.

If she ever tricks me into having a kid by not taking the pill or some shit, I swear to fucking jesus she is getting pushed down a very large set of stairs, whether a jail sentence or not.

>> No.5243509
File: 409 KB, 590x333, literay life.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5243509

>>5243493
Live a simple NEET life like Schoppy, Cioran, Diogenes et cetera. Work is only bearable if you're deluded.

>> No.5243511

>>5243493

>What should I do?

Whatever you like

I have a few good friends I hang out with sometimes, but even with them my contact is infrequent. When it comes to strangers I avoid interacting with them unless I need to.

>> No.5243515

>>5243500
Get sterilised ASAP, there's no trusting these bitches when they're all hormoned up.

>> No.5243526

>>5243500

I would be terrified if I was with a girl that wanted kids. It's never really a mutual decision, it's just "guess what we're having a kid"

I'm pretty schizoid so I don't ever see it becoming a problem, but I would have to kill they fetus as well. There is no greater crime in my eyes than bringing a kid into this world.

>> No.5243533

>>5243500
>>5243526
>tfw used to threaten my ex to kill her and whatever is in her womb as well as myself if she would ever try some shit.

They go from hating kids to thinking about baby names once their brains get flooded. They are not rational people.

>> No.5243539

If all optimists were killed instantly and all pessimists where allowed to remain here the world would become a drastically better place. It takes huge reservoirs of empathy and compassion to be a pessimist.

Optimists just have to hone their apathy to a fine point so that only things that directly negatively affect their lives in a significant way are worthy of feeling bad about. They are disgusting creatures.

>> No.5243558

>>5243533
It's not that they're not rational, it's just that you can't stand that they can be rational, and irrational at the same time, like a biologically, naturally created human fucking being. If your gf threatens to pull a kid out her womb, you need to act rational and stay the fuck away, instead of complaining that the world doesn't work your way.

>> No.5243562

>>5243392
I'm neither an optimist, nor a pessimist, tbh I'm just a realist. I try to do my best to be aware and know what is worth being optimistic about, and what is worth being pessimistic about.

>> No.5243569

>>5243562
all-pervasive pessimism is realism. you will learn, in time.

>> No.5243624

>>5243509
It's hard, though. I wouldn't be able to live, and writing like Cioran then publishing isn't easy. I'm in work right now, it's quite disheartening.

>> No.5243627

>>5243539
Kek

>> No.5243653

>>5243392
Some truth in this. Wallowing in the fact that the world is so awful when if you're privileged and have enough drive, you could do something to help this problem even though it is in a relatively small way. Because there are about a billion people suffering, there is no point in trying to help in a way which'd help 100 people. That's pessimist logic. If not, then why don't they try to do something unless they really don't care, which is unlikely and just an edgy veil in order to protect their quiet, no hope lives

>> No.5243655
File: 46 KB, 363x481, tfwnolegs.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5243655

Life seems to be the equivalent of matter getting cancer.

Regardless of how horrible their circumstances people always breed. There seems to be an extreme biocentric bias as part of an evolutionary imperative, we were slaves to our genes until the advent of consciousness, long after in fact. As a living thing it doesn't even occur to most people that living things might not be a good thing to make. I once pointed out to a girl I work with that she would be responsible for every harm her potential offspring would suffer if she chose to have children and she had never even remotely considered that idea, she actually seems shocked when I pointed it out.

People always cite evolution and psychology when I say this, but it is my sincere hope that consciousness will lead to a collective realization that we are needlessly perpetuating our own suffering by not recognizing life as a genuinely harmful thing that we have the power to stop. On our planet at least. I like to believe it's an inevitability.

As for evolution, I don't think evolutionary drives over the last few billion years are applicable because consciousness is essentially brand new, and it seems almost like a built in correcting mechanism if we get over our animal instincts and tremendous capacity for self deceit, and learn to use it. As for psychology I think it's almost useless until we are capable of mapping our brains sufficiently to truly understand whats going on, modern psychology will be about as respected as phrenology 100 years from now.

I'm not even a very unhappy person, I just think we need to stop and seriously think about what we're doing.

>> No.5243681
File: 23 KB, 299x450, 43784822234.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5243681

>>5243655

The fatigue and hardship of the world makes us want to repeat as farce our own childhood by proxy in our children.

It's easy to say that children are a means of living forever.

>> No.5243696

>>5243558
>It's not that they're not rational, it's just that you can't stand that they can be rational, and irrational at the same time
Spoken like a true womyn.

>> No.5243697
File: 53 KB, 567x397, cioran.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5243697

>>5243653
But there are over 7 billion people suffering. You miss the point if you think pessimism is about "some problems are too big to fix, don't try" that is just a defeatist attitude and not 'pessimist logic.' Life is a really terrible thing regardless of a persons circumstances. It would just be better to have never existed for everyone and everything.

>> No.5243701

>>5243697

If you come to this realization wouldn't it just be better to commit suicide?

>> No.5243702

All of these faggots who bang on about love in any sense of the word usually have absolutely no idea what temperance means

>> No.5243705

>>5243701

That would be absurd.

>> No.5243709

>>5243705

Please explain how?

>> No.5243716

>>5243697
But they do exist and you can't do anything to prevent it. A theory about people being happy in circumstances which are never going to happen has a value of 0.
People are suffering, we can do something about it and if you're a pessimist, you don't. That's a fact and a lack of perspective if you choose to ignore it.
To say, well, they're better off dead is a choice you an I make for them, one which is unlikely they're ok with. Life is shitty due to suffering, you and I can help alleviate suffering in some way, we don't. That's the practical result of pessimist logic

>> No.5243717

>>5243709

Read Camus' The Myth Of Sisyphus.

>> No.5243728

>>5243697
As for the fact everyone suffers, fine, but even if it's delusion, many enjoy life or at least would rather have life than nothingness otherwise they'd kill themselves

>> No.5243748

>>5243697
I want to get into Cioran, are all his works equally good or should I focus on a few pearls instead and if so which ones are those?

>> No.5243749

>>5243717
>Read Camus' The Myth Of Sisyphus.

stopped reading there

>> No.5243752

>>5243624
What do you work as?

>> No.5243753

>>5243749

I know this is too late but if you ever start reading again I want to say there are other books in the world.

>> No.5243765

>>5243753
>recent tripfag
>building a "persona" by replying to my shitposts

Get outta here

>> No.5243769

>>5243765

>engaging the named

>> No.5243780

>>5243728
>otherwise they'd kill themselves

That is not even remotely true. Tons of people would rather have never existed, but once you are already alive, taking your life is a very different thing. It does not follow that you must logically kill yourself if you hate life. It's a very hard thing for an organism to do regardless of how you feel about it, not to mention most people cause others suffering when they off themselves, and you are going to die anyway. It's essentially pointless unless you are unable to bear how much pain you are in.

>> No.5243788

>>5243780

Does pain have a value?

>> No.5243958

>>5243788
Negative value, yeah.

>> No.5243965

>>5243958

How does one accord a value? Do you have a system in place or is it just you saying 'I don't like pain'?

>> No.5243972

>>5243965
Depends on whether you're a moral realist/anti-realist, expressivist, cognitivist/non-cognitivist etc. For me personally it's a universalized "opinion".

>> No.5243985
File: 48 KB, 800x531, 23524667.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5243985

>>5243972

'kek'

>> No.5244014

>>5243655
things reproduce for the simple reason that things that don't only exist for a little while. just going "no! stop!" isn't going to help.

as evolution goes, though, having the sense to stop at some point is purely an advantage.

>> No.5244042

>>5243624
How wouldn't you be able to live?

>> No.5244053

The reason extra terrestrials haven't contacted humanity is because species more intelligent than us have all voluntarily gone extinct.

You can see this in humans as well. Negative birth rates in first world countries. Smart people having less children than dumb people. Once people get to a certain level of civilisation they become concious enough to stop reproducing.

>> No.5244071

>>5244053
This is what I think as well. If we do meet *something*, it will probably the automatized drones of some by-gone civilization.

>> No.5244086

>>5244053

I've imagined the same exact thing you posted to be true. I posted here on /lit/ about a short story I'm writing where the first people to get anywhere interesting in outer space find only extinct civilizations, to the dismay of everyone on board.

>> No.5244087

>>5243748
http://www.mediafire.com/download/dsakxf9dam6v73o/On_the_Heights_of_Despair_-_E._M._Cioran.epub
http://www.mediafire.com/download/qekuzvn1o8c1h57/On_the_Heights_of_Despair_-_E._M._Cioran.mobi
I was recommended this one.

>> No.5244091
File: 72 KB, 1041x397, omnicidism.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5244091

>>5243716
>not being a jihadist for nothingness

>> No.5244100

>>5244087
Cheers, I'll check this out and buy it on Bookdepo if it's any good.

>> No.5244106

>>5244086
Sounds like the Planet Zapffe project that one AN YouTuber/blogger is working on.

>> No.5244223
File: 31 KB, 421x433, 1404112257038.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5244223

>This thread
Let me tell you something you spineless wankers.
There is nothing more repulsive and antithetical to life than a pessimist. You people have so much provided for you that you can afford to waste away your days posting about how terrible the world is.
ON AN ANONYMOUS IMAGEBOARD ON THE FUCKING INTERNET
Does it not occur to any of you that there are millions, billions of people that have a situation worse than yours and yet continue living?
Does it not occur to you that, if life is so terrible as you constantly claim, that you might do something about it instead of wallowing in pathetic self-pity on 4chan?
Does it not occur to you that, if life is so terrible, you can leave it at any time and leave those who actually have balls behind to make this world better? Or are you so pathetic you can't even take your own life?

>> No.5244232

>>5244223
all of those things occur to everyone

>> No.5244248

>>5244232
And evidently, most people are too weak to act upon them, as shown by this thread.

>> No.5244253

>>5244248
(1) How bad someone's life isn't a "sated basic needs + acquired surplus material possessions" equation, you're as happy as your brain chemistry lets you be.
(2) Anti-natalism isn't necessarily about self-pity.
(3) Suicide isn't an option for most people at almost any given time.
(4) There isn't anyone to act on anything, read Metzinger.

>> No.5244256

>>5244223
>There is nothing more repulsive and antithetical to life than a pessimist.
That's the point dude.

Does it not occur to any of you that there are millions, billions of people that have a situation worse than yours and yet continue living?
Life is painful for everybody.

>make this world better
Hahahahaha good luck

Also
>advocating suicide
You sound like a pessimist

>> No.5244261

>>5243392
>optimists are pampered babies who expect the world to reward them for nothing
>optimists have never had a single bad experience which would throw their idiotic internal world out of the window

someshittymemepicture.jpg

>> No.5244265

>>5244253
>
(1) How bad someone's life isn't a "sated basic needs + acquired surplus material possessions" equation, you're as happy as your brain chemistry lets you be.
>you're as happy as your brain chemistry lets you be.
Shirking responsibility for your own happiness already? I would expect nothing less from a pessimist :)
>(2) Anti-natalism isn't necessarily about self-pity.
True, but looking at this thread someone would be shocked to learn that.
>(3) Suicide isn't an option for most people at almost any given time.
Bullshit. Unless you're literally disabled physically, you're more than capable of killing yourself.
>(4) There isn't anyone to act on anything, read Metzinger.
So instead of putting forth your own point of view, you're asking to read someone else's thoughts to avoid formulating your own argument?
Bravo.

>> No.5244277

>>5244265
Responsibility doesn't make sense unless you still buy into the dated, metaphysical view of a rational agent and not a sack of biomass that's a result of causal laws of the universe.

Same with suicide, it isn't about being physically able to perform a small movement with your index finger but the act of being able to put a loaded gun in your mouth and pull the trigger in the first place.

>you're wrong because you posit the views of someone better educated in the subject matter than you and don't even summarize them for the retard that I am
Bravo.

>> No.5244285

>>5244277
and think you're not a sack of biomass*

>> No.5244305

OP here, I'm too great to read your rationalizations, but I meant Pessimism not just being a mopey assbag in general.

>> No.5244306

>>5244277
>you're wrong because you posit the views of someone better educated in the subject matter than you and don't even summarize them for the retard that I am
I doubt you even understand them faggot, or else you'd be able to summarize them for me.
>Same with suicide, it isn't about being physically able to perform a small movement with your index finger but the act of being able to put a loaded gun in your mouth and pull the trigger in the first place.
>It's not about being able to perform a physical action, but about performing a physical action.
K buddy
>Responsibility doesn't make sense unless you still buy into the dated, metaphysical view
Now hold on, buddy. As far as I've heard, you haven't single handedly disproved free will.

>> No.5244312

>>5244248
It's pretty scary to shoot yourself bro. I've thought about suicide ever since I was a little kid and I'm too craven to act upon it, despite buying a gun for it, buying enough oxy to OD on etc. Your lizard brain kicks in unless you are completely gone.

The fact that others are worse off by some criteria like money or food security or medicine is irrelevant. Most people in the third world are actually happier than those in rich nations for various reasons like an actual sense of community, family anchoring, religion, all kinds of things. People in the west are miserable largely because we no longer struggle or believe in anything.

I also don't get why people taking up your side of the argument assume pessimists don't do things to try and help ease suffering. I mentor and volunteer and try to buy products that are made responsibly. The entire reason I'm a pessimist and want to end human life is to ease suffering, so I'm not apathetic or insensitive to the mass of human misery we are faced with. I have tremendous empathy for how much people suffer and I wouldn't have become a pessimist if I didn't. It's very important to realize that. I would have a cheerful world view if I could bury my head in the sand.

>> No.5244320

>>5243709
Not the guy you replied to, but how do we know what happens after death? Not existing didn't prevent me from coming into existance the first time around (assuming it was the first...) so death may not be the end.

>> No.5244322

>>5243392
Low expectations (pessimism about the future) lead to being happier over all. Since everything good is a pleasant surprise, and the worst that can happen is what the pessimist was counting on anyway (plus, there's that satisfaction in having your negative feelings validated).
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2014/07/31/1407535111.full.pdf+html

Pessimists live longer than optimists because they plan for the worst and don't expect some magical woodoo shit to save them.
http://psycnet.apa.org/?&fa=main.doiLanding&doi=10.1037/a0030797

But, whatever, faglord, I'm sure you've gotten life all figured out. That's why you're here posting trollthreads on /lit/.

>> No.5244332

>>5244265
>how dare you advise me to read a book!
>and on /lit/ of all places
>the nerve

>> No.5244333

>>5244091
Interesting pic. Might adopt this idea.

>> No.5244355

>>5244256
Doesnt the fact that people choose to live their life through the suffering shoe that love, happiness, and pleasure are much more prevelant/stronger. Its also dumb to say the universe would be better off without us cobsidering then itd just be a bunch of random collisions and explosions for the rest of eternity. Antinatalist just seem to whine about life being hard because muh girlfriend cheated then start blaming theyre being born for all their "suffering". there are many people who live lives much "harder" than yours but are much happier because they feel content about certain aspects of life and look at their "suffering" as trivial since the real suffers are starving kids. Youre just weak buddy, and want something to blame because unlike the ethipian farmer you cant look past your struggles.

>> No.5244379

Itt: /li/tards confusing pessimism with depression.

>> No.5244396

>>5244312
>are maiserable largely because we no longer struggle
I think that is a solid point. Though i would revise it as we dont see the point in our labour and dont have enough enjoyment outside since the majority just watch tv all day. So they feel unfufilled and overworked at their job and go home to senseless entertainment which once it turns off you dont feel any better than before.

>> No.5244407

>>5244355
>Doesnt the fact that people choose to live their life through the suffering shoe that love, happiness, and pleasure are much more prevelant/stronger.

No, only that they think so. The fact that they soldier through horrible suffering for no reason other than that "it might get better in the end" or that they think they have to, or whatever reason they have doesn't really mitigate suffering as such and it's not a worldview you have any reason to impose on anyone, which you do by giving birth to them.

I personally am not depressed at all and I'm not looking for anyone or anything to blame, I'm just a fact; non-existance has never hurt anyone.

>> No.5244416

>>5244407
*stating a fact, I meant to say...

>> No.5244417

>>5244379
This
Pessimism is thinking of the worse not not liking life. But seems like the thread got derailed by *tip* anitnatalists

>> No.5244444

>>5244407
Hpw do you know whether they know or just "think so".

>> No.5244467

>>5244444
I don't, but his example doesn't show anything. Only that people think it's true, regardless of whether or not it actually is true.

>> No.5244470

>>5244417
You're the confused one. Pessimism is a negative value judgement regarding existence, antinatalism is a reasonable consequence of it.

>> No.5244489

>>5244355

I'm not even that unhappy, it's just that I don't see the things I enjoy doing being much more than a way to pacify myself from reality. I can have as much fun and be happy as anyone else and still view life overall as a negative, useless, and painful thing.
Anyway, why does most peoples lives being "harder" invalidate my opinion?

>> No.5244493

>>5244223
>There is nothing more repulsive and antithetical to life than a pessimist.
No shit.

>You people have so much provided for you that you can afford to waste away your days posting about how terrible the world is.
Contemplation requires time, yes.

>ON AN ANONYMOUS IMAGEBOARD ON THE FUCKING INTERNET
Irrelevant.

>Does it not occur to any of you that there are millions, billions of people that have a situation worse than yours and yet continue living?
Of course, that's one of the main reasons for pessimism.

>Does it not occur to you that, if life is so terrible as you constantly claim, that you might do something about it instead of wallowing in pathetic self-pity on 4chan?
Life is inherently terrible, not in a fixable way. Still, living a compassionate life and at least not causing suffering is preferable.

>Does it not occur to you that, if life is so terrible, you can leave it at any time and leave those who actually have balls behind to make this world better? Or are you so pathetic you can't even take your own life?
That would be selfish.

>> No.5244512

>pessimists are realists who areright nine times out of ten

>> No.5244526

>>5244223
>just because someone is in worse condition than you you shouldn't be sad

That's like saying if someone is happier than you you shouldn't even be happy

>> No.5244572

>>5243428
Yes, so? Pessimists are less of a cause for that because they don't live much, they just wanna be dead. Violence and tragedy is a part of life. If you don't want to harm nothing you better not do anything, don't even move and stop living.

>> No.5244588

>>5244572
>raping children is good because it's more lively than reading a book

>> No.5244622

>>5244588
You're a word twister, mister.

>> No.5244630

>>5244622
You explicitly referred to violence and based one's liveliness (and therefore worth in your eyes) on the destruction and tragedy they spread around them.

So, why don't you live up to your philosophy? I guess optimists are just too chickenshit to start a Fight Club.

>> No.5244662

>>5244630
You misunderstood my usage of the world violence. The context gives meaning to it. Violence can be good or bad. If I drink the poison and it kills me, then it is bad. If I can digest it, it becomes juice to me and I grow more powerful in the process, thus poison was good for me. Violence is an essential part of life. For example, there is no thought without it. We don't have natural predisposition for thinking, a violent encounter forces us to think.
Raping children is a bad kind of violence. It creates nothing, only destroys, only makes people weaker.
The problem with a pessimist is that it sees all violence as bad or evil, it is a mistaken generalization.

>> No.5244673

>>5244662
>If I can digest it, it becomes juice to me and I grow more powerful in the process, thus poison was good for me.
This never happens though but keep up the good fight, you Übermensch you.

>> No.5244677

>>5244662
>The problem with a pessimist is that it sees all violence as bad or evil, it is a mistaken generalization.

The problem with this post is that it defines all pessimists as an amalgam of things the poster just pulled out of his ass, it is a mistaken generalization.

>> No.5244686

>>5244673
Happens all the time. My last obvious experience was with harsh noise music. It was too strong for me at first. But I kept pushing the limit, now I enjoy it very much and my perception of more conventional music has also became more rich.
More common example is exotic food. But this can be applied to anything, to any experience you desire.

>> No.5244688

>>5244686
>harsh noise music.
I want an example of this.

>> No.5244695

>>5244677
Yes, I agree. I just took my interpretation of that post. What would you say is a pessimist?

>> No.5244705

>>5244688
Here's one that is kind of psychedelic: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lbje734s6VE

>> No.5244738
File: 55 KB, 500x750, 1406280437879.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5244738

>>5244705
>>5244705
its fascinating how someone can actually listen to this. i wanna say its Le3deep4me but you sound like a reasonable person. is it because of desensitization for other genres?

>> No.5244748

>>5243486
>Phlegmatic supremacy

Stop giving a fuck assholes, not everything has to have your happy or sad dick juices.

>> No.5244750

>>5243493
Get over yourself

>> No.5244764

>>5244738
>is it because of desensitization for other genres?
It is because of interest for something different, something that seems stronger than me and thus unattainable at the moment. You could say it is an expansion of tastes and removing any limits you have.
But many people don't realize that it is often their own limits and generalizations that prevent them from enjoying it. For example, someone that dismisses the whole rap genre.

>> No.5244775
File: 128 KB, 600x798, Schwitters - Merzbau.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5244775

>>5244738
It's not deep at all. It's garbage.
He makes mockery of Kurt Schwitters' Merzbow

>> No.5244782
File: 98 KB, 640x960, FNJDd.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5244782

>>5244764
would you agree if i would assume there's something masocistic about the noise genre?

>> No.5244802
File: 1.84 MB, 850x566, Chop Por Homme.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5244802

>>5244775
well i tried no to prejudge for once (which i always do..), because my first instinct was "pretentious faggotry", but somehow i can understand the attraction for noise, but it seems like you have to suffer from some kind of disorder.
not even trolling.

>> No.5244803

>>5244686
>what doesn't kill you makes you stronger
>i know i listened to some really edgy music ones and it was really hard

lelling every lel

>> No.5244810

>>5244662
To what end can violence be good?

>> No.5244830

>>5244764
Dismissing the whole rap genre is not a bad idea:

>b-b-but some of the better rappers use language and sound skilfully and have meaningful things to say

Doesn't change the fact that the music is vulgar and savage and you shouldn't listen to it unless you want your emotions brutalized and intellect blunted for the sake of animalistic grooves and urban "swagger". Not to say that there aren't any talented hip hoppers. But there are talented murderers. Talent is not good in and of itself.
I personally think all music from Beethoven and beyond is really bad (basically, when romanticism took over, and everything after it). I know Beethoven is a genius - I know Wagner is a genius - but that doesn't mean that Beethoven's or Wagner's music is good. Their music is spectacularly terrible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HghTwMHW8hI
Listen to that. First few bars are really sweet and then it is interrupted for no reason by erratic nonsense.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsoUIBcl7iw
Listen to that. Sweet pastoral music, then 2 minutes in it goes bezerk for no intelligble reason.
Why couldn't the Romantics keep their emotions in check. They thought of themselves as "passionate" but really it comes across as neurotic.

>> No.5244833

>>5244782
Yes, depends on how you understand masochism. I see it precisely as submitting yourself to something stronger, pain is a non-essential element of it. This submitting is also a love of faith, removing your control-freak tendencies.

>> No.5244841

>>5244810
I think I explained in that post.

>> No.5244877

>>5244803
Am I right that you are assuming some kind of absolute conception of strength and weakness? Or even that this is primarily of physical nature in the sense of strong muscles and endurance of physical pain in the classical sense?

>> No.5244927

>>5244830
>Not to say that there aren't any talented hip hoppers. But there are talented murderers. Talent is not good in and of itself.
I agree with the last statement. But I think you're generalizing here a bit. There is indeed a lot of shit in rap music though, purely from the point of their values and effects that these have.
>First few bars are really sweet and then it is interrupted for no reason by erratic nonsense.
There is no pure nonsense, even chaos has meaning - as chaos if nothing else. Yes, those parts are harder to grasp by our perception, but that can be part of the point of it.
>Sweet pastoral music, then 2 minutes in it goes bezerk for no intelligble reason.
I don't see anything wrong with it. It creates a very sharp contrast to force strong emotions in you.

>> No.5244956

>>5244830
>I personally think all music from Beethoven and beyond is really bad (basically, when romanticism took over, and everything after it).

I tippeth my fedora to you, good sir. *tips*

>> No.5244980

>>5244841
Not really. Only that it causes you to think. Which assumes that thinking serves some higher goal or is the higher goal in itself.

>> No.5245033

>>5244980
Violence serves no higher goal than life itself. (Again, keep in mind the conception of violence that I gave above.) I would feel no activity if nothing strange would happen to me, no matter what that amount of strangeness it. Strange as something unexpected. Imagine being an all knowing God, it would be no fun at all. But each such strangeness is a sort of violence to me. I am hanging out with a friend, I don't know precisely what he will say, how he will act. The more he is strange to me, the more this feels like a force forcing me into some activity. What is important is the balance. My life can become very inactive if I avoid such encounters, if I hang out will people that are almost completely the same as me in every way.
It has no higher goal than to bring activity into life, life itself being measured by activity. But why would you want any higher goal than life itself? Would this not go against life?

>> No.5245123

>>5243509
I've tried, but I can't get on the dole. If you're white your shit out of luck.

>> No.5245154

>>5245033
So basically you're saying that violence is cool because it entertains you.

>> No.5245156

>>5244775
>It's not deep at all. It's garbage.
But wasn't that the point of Merzbau, to make things out of garbage? I'm not claiming there is any depth to it. Depth is a bit of a weird value that appeared with the romantics an the concept of a genius (as something in me), as in "in the depths of me".
>suffer from some kind of disorder
You can look at it as a disorder from the point of a rigidly ordered "mind", but there is no suffering to it. :)

>> No.5245157

>>5245123
How can you not get welfare if you're unemployed?

>> No.5245159

>>5244802
>>5245156

>> No.5245165

>>5245154
No, but because it is a condition for life. No violence, no activity. No activity, no life. Unless you reduce life to preservation, but that is reducing yourself to a stone.

>> No.5245171

>>5245165
What are plants?

>> No.5245173

>>5244320
This worries me. I didn't exist for billions of years, but now I do. Wtf... I didn't ask for this

>> No.5245191

>>5245171
Yes, you have a point. But we can't truly define what the word "life" means, it is impossible. it is a cultural concept that changed through history.
So we can either play word games, or we can get to the important question: would you reduce yourself to what you call a plant?

>> No.5245196

>>5245191
I'm challenging you assertion that violence a condition for life. Please prove this assertion. One can be more than a plant and still avoid violence.

>> No.5245199

>>5245157
Because my country tells me to eat shit.

>> No.5245219

>>5245196
>One can be more than a plant and still avoid violence.
Not in the absolute sense. Every affect is a violence on me, it has to be something different and other from me to be an affect at all. Otherwise I already have it and there's no change, no sensation, no thought - my being at that time is no different that being of a stone.

>> No.5245252

>>5245165
So what's so problematic about a lack of life?

>> No.5245290

>>5245252
In the absolute sense? Nothing, of course. There are no morals no values in the absolute sense. Nothing matters at all.
But I value life, at least I try to. It is pure choice, a decision. You will maybe say that I thus value suffering of others. Yes, in some sense I must value suffering itself if I want to value life. However, there are many ways to look at suffering, I don't want to generalize it. If suffering is such that it goes against life, that it lowers life, then I will be against it. I won't call it evil, I will call it bad for life. And I will try to develop ethics and politics based on this.

>> No.5245385

>>5245290
I get the whole Nietzschean vitality thing, but how would you define tendencies beneficial or detrimental to life in general?

>> No.5245402

>>5245219
I think you're doing violence to the word violence.

I also think you're simplistically correlating life with violence rather than showing how they necessarily and intrinsically are linked.

Try again.

>> No.5245529

>>5245385
From Nietzsche's perspective you could look what makes life reactive and what active, which I think is a very good basis.
>>5245402
>I think you're doing violence to the word violence.
Yes, I am doing it intentionally. I'm trying to go against the sort of conception of violence that leads to a hatred of life. Neither is correct, but they both come from and imply different values and interpretations.
>I also think you're simplistically correlating life with violence rather than showing how they necessarily and intrinsically are linked.
I view life not as a thing or being (in the Heideggerian sense), but as becoming (Heraclitus, Deleuze, process ontology). Life is life as far as it is moving, which implies difference. I view each such difference as violent because it creates disharmonies in this process since we experience time as a sort of synthesis of becoming. There are bigger and smaller such disharmonies and they don't apply just to basic affects, and they are also pleasurable or painful, they can destroy us or make us stronger.
But whether this is correct is not really that important to me. It's just a story that leads to certain values.