(Objectively) The smartest human ever? If not, whom?

File: 22 KB, 225x305, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Wed Jun 3 12:05:42 2015 No.6633415 [Reply] [Original]

(Objectively) The smartest human ever? If not, whom?

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 12:07:30 2015 No.6633423 File: 21 KB, 308x308, david lewis.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Lol. Stop making threads on this faggot There are living people who are more smart

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 12:08:38 2015 No.6633428 >>6633423 But David Lewis died 14 years ago

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 12:13:13 2015 No.6633447 >>6633428 What does David Lewis have to do with anything?

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 12:13:20 2015 No.6633448 >Whom is the smartest human ever? Don't use the word whom if you don't know how to use it.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 12:14:12 2015 No.6633450 >>6633415 Objectively, any hooker.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 12:15:58 2015 No.6633457 He was literally an insane person lol.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 12:16:18 2015 No.6633458 File: 37 KB, 460x568, heraclitus.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6633415

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 12:17:39 2015 No.6633461 >>6633415 literally a madman haha

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 12:18:21 2015 No.6633466 >>6633457 >Hasn't read Nietzsche's The Myth of Syphilis lol.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 12:27:54 2015 No.6633506 >>6633448 Whom are you talking to?

>>	the good tripfag !!TXcNl1PuD5F Wed Jun 3 12:28:09 2015 No.6633507 >>6633457 >>6633461 How do you suppose the smartest person is not a madman, samefag?

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 12:32:35 2015 No.6633521 >>6633507 tripfags aren't exactly the sharpest crayons in the box

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 12:38:50 2015 No.6633546 Nietzsche didn't believe in objectivity of value. Perhaps you should say perspectively the smartest person ever.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 12:45:34 2015 No.6633585 >>6633415 newton euler gauss einstein feynman

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 12:47:04 2015 No.6633596 Reminder that if Nietzsche had lived during the Middle Ages he would have been a harcore Christian.

>>	the good tripfag !!TXcNl1PuD5F Wed Jun 3 12:48:30 2015 No.6633602 >>6633521 Ad hominem.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 12:48:39 2015 No.6633603 >>6633521 tripfags aren't exactly the foulest stool in the pot

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 13:32:44 2015 No.6633782 >>6633521 tripfags aren't exactly the sharpest tool in the shed

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 13:36:47 2015 No.6633794 >>6633782 SOMEBODY

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 13:38:26 2015 No.6633800 >>6633415 >whom

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 13:41:24 2015 No.6633806 >>6633602 do you have any idea what a fucking ad hominem fallacy is

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 13:42:00 2015 No.6633809 >>6633415 depends on your definition of intelligence and what field of knowledge they toil in.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 13:45:23 2015 No.6633822 >>6633466 underrated post

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 13:46:49 2015 No.6633826 File: 489 KB, 1152x1600, 1431288789786.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6633415 Based Thomas

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 13:47:13 2015 No.6633828 File: 316 KB, 800x956, Saint_Thomas_Aquinas_Diego_Velázquez.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6633415 it's not surprising TBH, he had the Holy Spirit with him

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 13:55:32 2015 No.6633852 >>6633585 >scientists >intelligent Top kek

Anonymous Wed Jun 3 13:59:00 2015 No.6633862

I wish Nietzsche had been born later. Imagine what he could have done had he known of post Nash equilibria and Game Theory, modern cultural anthropology, and the like.

The problem with Nietzsche is he anticipates much, but lacks a cogent framework with which to express his thoughts. He's a 20th century author trapped in the 19th.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 13:59:56 2015 No.6633866 >not christopher nolan 4u

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 14:05:58 2015 No.6633895 File: 20 KB, 335x450, parmenides.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6633415

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 14:06:17 2015 No.6633897 File: 34 KB, 572x410, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6633415 Only insecure teenagers or man children care about either the question or the answer.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 14:08:13 2015 No.6633903 >>6633862 >lacks a cogent framework that's precisely the reason for his strength

Anonymous Wed Jun 3 14:15:59 2015 No.6633937

>>6633903

It is evidence of original genius, yes, but it's also a hindrance from a strictly rhetorical standpoint. British critics have crucified him on the basis of their misunderstanding of his work, which poisons the viewpoint of those who do intend to read him, and turns off those who would presumably most benefit.

>>	the good tripfag !!TXcNl1PuD5F Wed Jun 3 14:17:31 2015 No.6633944 >>6633806 Sure do, little buddy. In this case it's how he derogated my being a tripfag instead of grappling with the topic at hand, e.g. answering the fucking question.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 14:19:36 2015 No.6633953 File: 487 KB, 692x692, 1431950053913.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] are you 16?

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 14:27:17 2015 No.6633979 Statistically unlikely, to say nothing of the issues with the idea of "objective measures of intelligence".

Anonymous Wed Jun 3 14:29:31 2015 No.6633995
File: 67 KB, 494x427, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6633937
Who cares? If people misunderstand him it's not his fault, if he's not accessible to certain groups it doesn't matter, if he only writes for the "initiated" who cares.

I can only speak for myself but to get on any author's work there is a requirement of self-thought from you, yes, be it YA or some obscure philosopher, certain thoughts you have made yourself give you access to enjoying/comprehending the author, be it little kids thinking about heroism before reading some fantasy novel or thinking about the nature of morals for a phil. text.

You can take a horse to the river, but you can't make him drink, and you certainly can't give him a mouth if he doesn't have one.

>>	the good tripfag !!TXcNl1PuD5F Wed Jun 3 14:40:31 2015 No.6634039 >>6633995 >You can take a horse to the river, but you can't make him drink, and you certainly can't give him a mouth if he doesn't have one. You cannot speak of ocean to a well-frog -Zhuangzi

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 14:46:57 2015 No.6634062 >>6634039 Noice. I'm gonna remember this one.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 14:48:15 2015 No.6634069 >>6633585 >Newton cool meme friend

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 14:50:21 2015 No.6634077 >>6633596 Reminder the church was the only source of education for layman during the middle ages unless one was of nobility.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 14:52:23 2015 No.6634084 >>6633585 Von Neumann is whom I would put as one of the smartest.

Anonymous Wed Jun 3 15:00:29 2015 No.6634103

>>6633944
Ad hominem doesn't apply for tripfags.
Whoever who uses a name in a predominantly anonymous board is seeking for attention to some extent, biasing everything they say because they will focus to give some sort of character to his persona, even in detriment of his message.
That's why most of the time they generate conflict, because when they're proven to be mistaken they try to stick to their identity, defending their point of views not because they have a reason to it but mostly because their identity is being threatened.

This is a irrefutable truth.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 15:02:34 2015 No.6634112 >>6633415 >Daily reminder that Nietzsche died a kissless virgin

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 15:04:08 2015 No.6634116 >>6634112 HE FUCKED THE METAPHYSICS LIKE YO MOMMA DONT KNOW BOY!

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 15:05:48 2015 No.6634122 >>6634112 >died a kissless virgin >died from syphilis

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 15:10:05 2015 No.6634136 Me :^)

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 15:10:16 2015 No.6634139 >>6634112 He fucked a horse, that counts right?

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 15:13:53 2015 No.6634153 >>6633995 you sir are a genius!

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 15:15:25 2015 No.6634157 >>6634112 and? do we value people by how many women they fuck?

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 15:15:48 2015 No.6634160 File: 152 KB, 960x1277, Based Carl.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >smartest human ever >anybody other than Carl Schmitt topkek. Hans Kelsen pls go

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 15:18:14 2015 No.6634165 File: 32 KB, 320x320, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6634153 Not even close. And if you read what I said you'd notice I said no thing about intelligence. You, sir, are even more smartismart!

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 15:37:50 2015 No.6634218 >>6634122 Educated people studying his death have determined that he actually died from Brain Cancer.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 15:39:36 2015 No.6634223 >>6634218 no, he got c@nzur b0$$

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 15:39:54 2015 No.6634227 >>6634165 who is this

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 15:42:42 2015 No.6634242 File: 67 KB, 450x599, jonah_fedora.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6633852 philosophers are smarter than mathematicians

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 15:42:54 2015 No.6634244 >>6633596 Reminder that if my auntie had nuts she'd be my uncle.

>>	ΟΥΤΙΣ Wed Jun 3 15:43:45 2015 No.6634249 >>6634227 A heartthrob of men who have no prospects in real life.

Anonymous Wed Jun 3 15:44:04 2015 No.6634250

>>6634218
>>6634122

The evidence is conclusive.

http://www.leonardsax.com/Nietzsche.pdf

Many scholars have argued that Nietzsche’s dementia was caused by
syphilis. A careful review of the evidence suggests that this consensus is probably
incorrect. The syphilis hypothesis is not compatible with most of the evidence available.
Other hypotheses – such as slowly growing right-sided retro-orbital meningioma –
provide a more plausible fit to the evidence."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/3313279/Madness-of-Nietzsche-was-cancer-not-syphilis.html

The new research was carried out by Dr Leonard Sax, the director of the Montgomery Centre for Research in Child Development in Maryland, America. Dr Sax made his discovery after studying accounts of Nietzsche's collapse with dementia in 1889. He was admitted to an asylum in Basle, Switzerland, and was initially diagnosed as being in the advanced stages of syphilis.
According to Dr Sax, however, Nietzsche's notes show no signs of the symptoms which are now regarded as evidence of this disease, such as an expressionless face and slurred speech.
"Nietzsche exhibited none of these symptoms," said Dr Sax. "His facial expressions remained vivid, his reflexes were normal, tremor was not present, his handwriting after his collapse was at least as good as it had been in previous years - and his speech was fluent."
Dr Sax added that in the late 19th century more than 90 per cent of those with advanced syphilis rapidly declined and died within five years of diagnosis. Nietzsche, in contrast, lived for another 11 years.

According to Dr Sax, the suggestion that Nietzsche caught syphilis from prostitutes arose in 1947. In a book condemning Nietzsche's role in Nazi philosophy, Lange-Eichbaum alleged that a Berlin neurologist had once told him that the philosopher "had infected himself with syphilis in a Leipzig brothel during his time as a student there, and that he had been treated for syphilis by two Leipzig physicians".
Despite the lack of documentary or medical evidence, the allegation has since been repeated without question by generations of academics, said Dr Sax. "Extraordinarily, this single passage in Lange-Eichbaum's obscure book is the chief foundation, cited again and again, that Nietzsche had syphilis."

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 15:48:09 2015 No.6634271 >>6634227 Perseus Projectura

Anonymous Wed Jun 3 15:50:11 2015 No.6634278

Nietzsche's genius is the tension between his shrewd psychological insight and his giddy German romanticism, or, in his terms, the tension between his Apollonian and Dionysian spirits.

Aristotle was a better Apollonian and as for Dionysian, his fellow German romantic Novalis was superior.

http://www.logopoeia.com/novalis/hymns.html

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 15:51:31 2015 No.6634283 >>6633415 >whom you stupid shit 'whom' is not just an eloquent 'who'

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 16:15:29 2015 No.6634370 >>6633448 Don't even use it in 2015

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 16:18:20 2015 No.6634383 >>6634370 Yes, do use it, where appropriate. 'Whom' has a valid function. Don't let the people who don't know how to use it destroy it.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 17:53:25 2015 No.6634723 >>6634278 What noble crap! >he was tortured between 2 passions Where do you find this crap?

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 17:54:42 2015 No.6634729 >>6634283 Whilst you use that I'll use the other.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 23:09:14 2015 No.6636043 File: 60 KB, 403x524, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6634283 >>6634370 C>>6633953 >>6633897 >>6633800 >>6633448 >/lit/ >not assuming blatant grammar error is b8 >dfw

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 23:10:47 2015 No.6636049 albert enisten :^)

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 23:39:49 2015 No.6636163 >>6633415 That's not Milton

>>	Anonymous Wed Jun 3 23:47:01 2015 No.6636186 >>6633415 Uh, that's now how whom is used. It has to be the object of a verb or preposition, like me or him are used.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 08:18:07 2015 No.6637367 >>6633585 >putting Feynman above Heisenberg and Fermi Pleb

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 08:19:19 2015 No.6637371 >>6633596 >Middle Ages >Christian O I am laffin

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 08:28:12 2015 No.6637387 >>6633415 Alan Turing

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 08:32:33 2015 No.6637393 >>6637387 Literally a cocksucker

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 08:38:00 2015 No.6637408 >>6633415 My vote goes to Einstein or Turing. Newton would be second.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 08:45:19 2015 No.6637423 >>6637408 Einstein is overrated, especially when compared to Heisenberg, Fermi, Niels Bohr

Anonymous Thu Jun 4 08:47:37 2015 No.6637432

>>6634039
You can feed the horse salty snacks making it desperate for water and they also give surgery to babies born without anuses all the time.

You easterners are always so accepting of fate. Try to care about the outcome a little more and you might get somewhere.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 08:49:23 2015 No.6637439 >>6633415 Isaac Asimov, by his own admission: >Isaac Asimov described Sagan as one of only two people he ever met whose intellect surpassed his own. The other, he claimed, was the computer scientist and artificial intelligence expert Marvin Minsky.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 08:49:42 2015 No.6637441 >>6637432 haven't you been told to stop thinking about baby's anuses?

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 09:04:01 2015 No.6637470 File: 33 KB, 309x337, Bun fun.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6637441 They probably have one of those hotdog bun piercers and bounce the baby onto it.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 09:13:03 2015 No.6637496 >>6633415 Pessimist: He was born by long time ago. We did not memorize it. We were foolish. Optimist: He is will born in the future.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 09:16:19 2015 No.6637500 My vote is for Wittgenstein

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 09:24:56 2015 No.6637513 File: 1.51 MB, 425x481, 1411680071129.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] probably some autistic savant locked in his basement forecasting the apocalypse through binary matrices the world will never know

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 14:31:57 2015 No.6638643 >>6637423 You missed Dirac.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 14:33:12 2015 No.6638650 I would say Newton though for being influential across so many fields.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 18:03:08 2015 No.6639414 >>6634103 Still an ad hominem attack. If you say that something isn't true because the person who made the claim is usually dishonest, then you have used an ad hominem fallacy.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 18:12:57 2015 No.6639455 Socrates (Plato), Nietzsche, or Walter Benjamin

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 18:17:38 2015 No.6639475 >>6639455 >Socrates (Plato), Get this dialectician outta here.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 18:19:24 2015 No.6639480 File: 15 KB, 151x425, stirner 4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Stirner said more in The Ego than Nietzche ever did, and with less edge.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 18:28:00 2015 No.6639502 >>6633450 Who's the world's smartest hooker?

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 18:29:06 2015 No.6639507 >>6633461 So I told Friedrich to reevaluate all values... He actually did it, the absolute madman! Hahaha!

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 19:51:43 2015 No.6639810 Goethe

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 19:53:07 2015 No.6639817 >>6639480 how did stirner say more than nietzsche?

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 19:55:04 2015 No.6639832 >>6633423 Is that benatar?

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 19:56:17 2015 No.6639842 >>6633602 FUCK OFF TRIPFAGGOT GET OFF MY BOARD

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 19:56:38 2015 No.6639844 File: 11 KB, 200x219, 16593.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6633415 /thread

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 20:06:31 2015 No.6639894 >>6639480 Lol, I don't think even Stephen King has said more than Nietzsche.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 20:08:18 2015 No.6639904 >>6639894 That's trivially true, because Stephen King has never said anything.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 20:12:16 2015 No.6639924 >>6639844 Ben Stiller is not that smart.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 20:13:27 2015 No.6639928 >>6639904 Heh, I saw that coming. Ok, fine. Nietzsche had a larger amount of meaningful things to say than King has meaningless.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 20:19:13 2015 No.6639943 >>6639924 eheheheh

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 20:20:27 2015 No.6639949 >>6639502 well Jake Hooker won a Pulitzer Prize so I guess he is pretty smart

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 20:54:30 2015 No.6640100 File: 39 KB, 448x293, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6633415 You're all dumb. Pic related is the smartest ever.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 21:04:17 2015 No.6640140 >>6640100 Other than be a riddler the only things he ever did was that inane aesthetic rant at the end of PoTA.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 21:14:00 2015 No.6640176 File: 75 KB, 250x335, thisguy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] pic related

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 21:16:24 2015 No.6640189 >>6640100 God bless you.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 21:32:27 2015 No.6640268 File: 329 KB, 352x500, 400000000000000232768_s4.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6633415 Yes. And this is objectively his best book.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 21:33:50 2015 No.6640275 >>6640268 >objectively you havent learned anything dog

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 4 21:44:05 2015 No.6640342 File: 1.01 MB, 195x144, 1363839003013.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6640275 k

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 5 01:57:19 2015 No.6641325 >>6640268 >>6633415 >Praise Nietzsche as being absolutely correct and the smartest human ever >believe in objectivity You guys aren't very bright, huh?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 5 02:19:47 2015 No.6641369 Richard Dawkins or Bertrand Russell are the smartest people ever

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 5 03:21:00 2015 No.6641493 >>6633415 >>6633415 Leonardo da Vinci, he was literally a polymath

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 5 03:41:25 2015 No.6641545 >>6637500 Whitehead my vote

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 5 03:49:02 2015 No.6641566 >>6641369 faggot detected

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 5 04:15:29 2015 No.6641642 >>6633415 Bach screw scientists screw philosophers this man was the smartest fuckin man on the planet and everything he contributed exudes this literally wrote every single rule for music

Anonymous Fri Jun 5 04:20:48 2015 No.6641654

His metaphysics is a Pantheistic soup called "the will to power". Everything is "the will to power". That's not better than the pre-Socratics thinking that everything was water or fire. Nietzsche, despite reading Greek, was not an intellectual kind of mind, one that can carefully make distinctions, like Aristotle, so that you don't end up reducing everything to water, or fire, or atoms, or energy, or force, or "Will".
Nietzsche was fundamentally a German romantic. That's not really an intellectual type, it's poetic.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 5 04:22:44 2015 No.6641656 >>6641642 Bach's sacred music is bad (that mind sound hyperbolic, but listen to Palestrina and you will know what I mean. Bach's sacred music is pastoral music with occasional fits of ecstasy). His fugues often sound like mathematical finger exercises.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 5 04:28:26 2015 No.6641678 >>6639507 i love this shit. ahh use guys

Anonymous Fri Jun 5 04:28:36 2015 No.6641680

>>6641656

Bach's music about Christ
http://youtu.be/FwWL8Y-qsJg

Palestrina music about Christ
http://youtu.be/EuV1JL8EgP0

Bach's is a very sweet melody but it is pastoral, not sacred. And I think that applies to pretty much all of Bach's "sacred" music.

Anonymous Fri Jun 5 04:33:31 2015 No.6641693

Leibniz hands down. Mindblowing that nobody has cited him.
Though I have a hard on for my husbando Michelangelo.
For a literary figure, I may go for Balzac. Strike me as the most "intelligent".

>>6637439
Lel

>>6638643
Dirac is plebeian.
>Making a tantrum against poetry
>Being a typical no fun allowed moron
>Promoting his bizarro formalism in all points inferior to Von Neumann

>>6634160
Patrician choice.

Anonymous Fri Jun 5 04:34:34 2015 No.6641697

>>6641680

>applies to all Bach's "sacred" music

I suspect you have absolutely no fucking idea what you're talking about. It's clear you haven't listened to most of the chorales, nor the Psalms, nor any of his music if you would seriously make an assumption like that.

Anonymous Fri Jun 5 04:36:22 2015 No.6641704

>>6641680
More Bach
http://youtu.be/GWMn7PkOFjY

Now, mind you, this is a MASS. A Mass is in the Catholic tradition about the sacrifice of Christ at Calvary, the crucifixion and redemption. Does this music in ANY way evoke that sacrifice? Looked at in this way, not only is the music not sacred, it is positively profane, but really this reflects the Protestant idea of the Mass as a communal meal, hence the reduction of the sacred to the mere pastoral.

Palestrina Mass
http://youtu.be/BRfF7W4El60

Anonymous Fri Jun 5 04:36:46 2015 No.6641707

>>6641656

>mathematical finger exercises
>sacred music bad

dog you are on a low ass level mentally

>>6640100

truth.

>>6640140

read the Oxen of the Sun chapter in Ulysses if you want to see an author retrace the literary steps of his species (in perfect form), then read the Sirens chapter to see the most musical and sublime prose ever written. Proust was a sandbox toy-boy compared to Nobodaddy Joyce

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 5 04:37:02 2015 No.6641709 >>6641680 >There are people that don't have Matthews Passion in their top choices Guess we need all tastes in nature, r-right?

Anonymous Fri Jun 5 04:43:33 2015 No.6641724

>>6641697
>Psalms
http://youtu.be/DHCoKWZLXKA
More of the same. The guy even uploaded a pastoral image to go with it, lol.

>Chorale
http://youtu.be/W_c_JjNdu9M
Another pastoral image. I'm not cherry picking, these are the first videos that came up.

Bach's sacred music is more fit for the countryside than the inner sanctuary of a church.

>>6641709
His Passion demonstrates what I mean better than any other piece of his music. It's human affectation over and over with occasional flights of ecstasy/trance. It's precisely this introduction of affectation that gives his music a profane sound.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 5 04:47:26 2015 No.6641740 I mean listen to the first bars of his St. Matthews Passion. It anticipates Beethoven. It's a kind of melancholy brooding atmosphere. Listen from 09:09 to 09:52. Human affectation followed by ecstatic flight.

Anonymous Fri Jun 5 04:52:13 2015 No.6641755

>>6641740
> It's a kind of melancholy brooding atmosphere.

Well, you might say, isn't it entirely appropriate to have this atmosphere in regards to the Passion. Wouldn't St. Mary and St. John have felt this excruciating melancholy at the foot of the cross?
This is the thing. His emphasis is on the felt human emotion at the foot of the cross, rather than on the glory of God. His emphasis is on man, not God. It's human passion that is the object of this music, not Christ's Passion; it does not want to praise Christ, it wants to describe human psychology. It is theatre.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 5 08:42:12 2015 No.6642270 Anaximander

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 5 08:52:15 2015 No.6642287 >>6637500 Easily Wittgenstein

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 5 08:55:20 2015 No.6642295 >>6640140 It was meant to be half baked and sloppy, Stephen was a cocky shit. Wasn't meant to be a treatise of Joyce's personal views regarding aesthetics.

Anonymous Fri Jun 5 09:13:54 2015 No.6642324

>>6633415
Well, if we are being objective it was probably some poor fuck born in a shitty disease infested time with no outlet for his genius, maybe 4,000 BC farming somewhere

But out of actual knowable people:
Rimbaud - He is really the only person that amazed me with how fast they learned while not being a total retard autist in all other fields

Goethe - it is obvious, while he lacked modern day knowledge he clearly was brilliant

but something that always hangs in the back of my mind is, if someone is truly a genius, it seems they would be so far ahead of most people contemporary that they would not be well known because no one could relate to them.

Honorable mentions:Pasternak, Keats

>>	the good tripfag !!TXcNl1PuD5F Fri Jun 5 09:21:59 2015 No.6642337 >>6639842 Haha.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 5 12:43:48 2015 No.6642905 >>6642324 Pasternak? Why?

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature