/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.6971284]

>/lit/ BTFO

>https://www.reddit.com/r/AskWomen/comments/3grhbs/what_books_would_you_not_want_to_see_on_someones/

>What annoys me about philosophy in a general sense is it tries to answer questions it has no business answering. Philosophy thinks it is a science but it is not, and can not answer questions outside of human experience. It is thought experiment, and one that is often taken to such circuitous lengths as to practically lose meaning. I'll just put it this way: I've attended a lot of talks by Lawrence Krauss.

A person can be interested in philosophy and that's fine by me, and I do think philosophy has its place. But if your bookshelf has dozens of philosophy books then I can imagine that's what a lot of the conversations we will have will involve and that will frustrate me.

[Anonymous No.6971294]

Implying I like philosophy because I think it improves my chances of fucking girls who post on reddit, huh?

Well, it got a reply out of me.

[Anonymous No.6971295]

>you can like x
>but if you like too much of x I get butthurt

So, mediocre people general?

[Anonymous No.6971297]

I like how people here seem to think Science is a sort of evil concept that will destroy mankind despite evidence of the contrary.

[Anonymous No.6971301]

>>6971295
Basically women in a nutshell: I want you to have cool interests, but not an interest that you like so much you will put it above me.

[Anonymous No.6971303]

>>6971297
>FAKEosophy is 4 fags I'm a le scientist

[Anonymous No.6971314]

>implying females actually end marrying guys who enjoy fiction

[Anonymous No.6971321]

>>6971303
>le tippy toppy hat xD

[Anonymous No.6971331]

>>6971321
>I countermeme memes

[Anonymous No.6971341]

>>6971331
>le toppy tippy hat xD

[Anonymous No.6971346]

>>6971284
>AskWomen

Why on earth would anyone want to do that.

[Anonymous No.6971351]

[Anonymous No.6971379]

>>6971297
Science means empirically and rationally evaluating evidence and doing experiments.

So what has science got to do with normative ethics? Literally zero, so yes, it can destroy the world.

Science can make you create the bomb, but it can't tell you that dropping the bomb is wrong. Or right for that matter.

[Anonymous No.6971382]

>I'm an agnostic atheist, skeptic, and rational thinker. I would look askance at any books promoting woo woo thinking, including sappy religious books. I would also raise an eyebrow at any books embracing extreme political views.

Christfags BTFO'd

[Anonymous No.6971402]

Hoho boy, one more STEM autist who doesn't get what philosophy even is. I care so deeply.

[Anonymous No.6971420]

>>6971382
>I would also raise an eyebrow at any books embracing extreme political views.
>>6971284
>But if your bookshelf has dozens of philosophy books then I can imagine that's what a lot of the conversations we will have will involve and that will frustrate me.

I've never heard of people so intent on being dull.

[Anonymous No.6971430]

>>6971284
>Philosophy thinks it is a science but it is not, and can not answer questions outside of human experience.

[Anonymous No.6971432]

>>6971430
Get out of /jp/! Go and stay go!

[Anonymous No.6971435]

Yet another example of how women can't into philosophy.

>whiteknights and cucks will defend this

[Anonymous No.6971446]

>>6971432
/jp/ is dead and I took its memes with me

[Anonymous No.6971594]

>>6971435
Don't judge all women by the human detritus that congress on Reddit. That place is the fucking Agora of mediocrity.

[Anonymous No.6971608]

>>6971594
LONDON

[Anonymous No.6971624]

>>6971284
>philosophy isn't a science
>use word experiment to describe philosophy

philosophy uses the same basis of reason that science does. if a then b then c. basic logic applies to both fields, and if you aren't well-read enough, either don't engage in philosophical arguments with people who are or ask them to explain their viewpoints clearly. dismissing one of the oldest and richest fields of study just because you got bootyblasted is childish.

[Anonymous No.6971646]

>there are pro nazi books out there ? I have never heard of a book being pro nazi. Would you consider something like this to be pro nazi ? Also what about ebooks. If someone doesnt have a book shelf do you ask if they read ebooks ?
where do these people come from

[Anonymous No.6971651]

>>6971284
lol i bet she reads harry potter

[Anonymous No.6971698]

>Having an actual bible.

[Anonymous No.6971707]

>>6971698
>not having one

[Anonymous No.6971710]

>>6971624
Relevant article to the faulty line of thinking this woman is going through:

http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-folly-of-scientism

(I swear this isn't a conspiracy magazine, the title is from a Francis Bacon short story, not the possible existence of Atlantis)

[Anonymous No.6971718]

>>6971284
>Philosophy thinks it is a science but it is not, and can not answer questions outside of human experience
Most great philosophers all knew this, this bitch confirmed for entry level philosophy understanding

[Anonymous No.6971726]

>>6971707
That was one of the reddit quotes, of course I have a bible (2 translations actually)

[Anonymous No.6971740]

>>6971284
>Philosophy thinks it is a science
Nobody thinks philosophy is a "science" in the same way that biology, physics or chemistry.
You could compare it to mathematics in the manner they both rely on deductive reasoning.

[Anonymous No.6971750]

>>6971284
philosophy exists because of the impulse for transcendence in humanity

she literally has no idea about what she's talking about

[Anonymous No.6971765]

>questions outside of human experience


Have those people never heard about the category? Cogito ergo sum? Hegel's concept? There is neither a 'pure matter' outside human understanding or a pure self outside the concrete reality it conceptualizes, those are the same kind of abstractions as the God they so think is a 'superstition'.

[Anonymous No.6971773]

>>6971382
Well, I automatically know HER opinion isn't to be trusted. Fucking atheists.

[Anonymous No.6971781]

ITT insecure betas getting assblasted by the truth and attempting to prove to themselves that what the redditor said isn't true

it is

[Anonymous No.6971791]

>>6971781
>muh scientism
really got me there anon

[Anonymous No.6971795]

>>6971284
>What annoys me about philosophy in a general sense is it tries to answer questions it has no business answering

Copywriting? Interpreting? Correspondent?

[Anonymous No.6971802]

>>6971382
I don't know about you, but vocal atheist girls are usually huge cunts.
And yeah, my shelf is filled with Augustine, Aquinas, Dante, Chesterton, Lewis, Wolfe and more. Feels good, great authors.

[Anonymous No.6971809]

>>6971781
that it is true is precisely the problem, philosophy in general is the realization that truth is not a purely negative of consciousness but is at the same time produced by its understanding and action.

[Anonymous No.6971817]

>>6971382
>at any books promoting woo woo thinking, including sappy religious books

truly the words of a rationally minded objective skeptic untainted by bias of any kind

>I would also raise an eyebrow at any books embracing extreme political views.

but she'd finger herself to a treatise on militant atheism tbh

[Anonymous No.6971825]

>>6971284
>>What annoys me about philosophy in a general sense is it tries to answer questions it has no business answering. Philosophy thinks it is a science but it is not, and can not answer questions outside of human experience. It is thought experiment, and one that is often taken to such circuitous lengths as to practically lose meaning. I'll just put it this way: I've attended a lot of talks by Lawrence Krauss

kek philosopher tards literally BTFO by dumb women on reddit

[Anonymous No.6971840]

>>6971825
Yes, because a man who wrote books like this is surely smarter than Socrates?

[Anonymous No.6971855]

>>6971840
well at least he could write, which can't be said about socrates.

although I haven't read the work in question I'll also assume it builds maybe on wild speculations but at least not on a series of logical fallacies.

[Anonymous No.6971862]

>>6971710
>Hawking and Mlodinow, in the chapter of their book called “The Theory of Everything,” quote Albert Einstein: “The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible.” In response, Hawking and Mlodinow offer this crashing banality: “The universe is comprehensible because it is governed by scientific laws; that is to say, its behavior can be modeled.” Later, the authors invite us to give ourselves a collective pat on the back: “The fact that we human beings — who are ourselves mere collections of fundamental particles of nature — have been able to come this close to an understanding of the laws governing us and our universe is a great triumph.” Great triumph or no, none of this addresses Einstein’s paradox, because no explanation is offered as to why our universe is “governed by scientific laws.”

E. is right indeed. The gap has widened in a century. hawking is just like the dawkins of physics

people think that the foremost questions in science is what is space, time, temperature, quarks and so on. No, the sole crucial and urgent question is why the humanity is able to predict [more or less] through induction , itself formalized via the rules of inferences.

[and also, why the humanity believes that to offer some mechanical model is knowledge about the world]

[Anonymous No.6971865]

>>6971297
No, just people who don't care about science bow to science when it suits them and that is funny.
Like all you have to do is think what are we doing science for in the first place and you are already doing philosophy so when people try to distance the two it's funny.

[Anonymous No.6971876]

>>6971382
Wait how do you know they believed the political views?

[Anonymous No.6971888]

At least they understand how shitty Ayn Rand is.

[Anonymous No.6971919]

>>6971862
the point you are forgetting is that the universe is in fact ruled by exact mathematical laws. Mathematics isn't just a description of the universe, it's an inherent property of the universe.

So rather than describing it people are really busy understanding it.

[Anonymous No.6971945]

>>6971919
>the point you are forgetting is that the universe is in fact ruled by exact mathematical laws. Mathematics isn't just a description of the universe, it's an inherent property of the universe.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_universe_hypothesis

yes, but at best is it constructive math. And then, why do we have classical math, if the universe is only constructive ?

[Anonymous No.6971952]

Fuck women, amirite?

[Anonymous No.6971958]

>>6971919
>Math is inherent

When the ideology so swell that you let out a lel

[Anonymous No.6971976]

>>6971958
what's the alternative? we came up with some rules and the universe thought it was such neat idea it might as well stick to them?

[Anonymous No.6971984]

>>6971945
>algebra-based physics

[Anonymous No.6971987]

>>6971976
The alternative is that we have found "rules" that describe the universe only insofar as they have not been proven wrong yet. Nothing is entirely certain, only really probable. Science is fucking bonkers when you start trying to make 100% predictions.

[Anonymous No.6972002]

>>6971976
there isn't, but this doesn't change that human consciousness and the 'universe' are not separate and negative of each other, math can only exist within a set of human spirit and a background of actuality together, they are both essential moments.

[Anonymous No.6972004]

>r/AskWomen

Well there's your problem

[Anonymous No.6972005]

>>6971987
>Science is fucking bonkers when you start trying to make 100% predictions.

yeah that's the crux of the whole determinism issue really. On a sub-nano scale everything is by probabilities rather than absolutes, but when you scale up to macroscale you'll get a probabilistic determinism which means you can't tell where an electron is exactly going but it works for anything upwards of a couple of atoms.

[Anonymous No.6972008]

>>6971919
are you arguing that numbers are real things?

[Anonymous No.6972013]

>90% mentions Mein Kampf
>10% mentions the Game

I bet they haven't read either, god women are such plebs

not even Esther Vilar?

[Anonymous No.6972015]

>>6972002
I.e. reality is neither purely subjective nor objective but a movement between both.

[Anonymous No.6972019]

>>6972008
no

numbers have nothing to do with laws and correlations

[Anonymous No.6972030]

Women are philistines and Schopenhauer was right again, in other news grass is green and water is wet

[Anonymous No.6972064]

>>6972013
What I find most interesting is that very few people took the same attitude to communism.

It baffles me that one is an automatically bad thing while the other is still widely defended.

[Anonymous No.6972082]

>>6972064
to women communism isn't that far off, they live of other people's resources one way or another. And when they "think" about political or economic systems they'll come up with some childlike hugbox of "why don't we just give everyone money?"

[Anonymous No.6972090]

>>6972019
>Mathematics isn't just a description

so then what is it? also you should be more commital about your grammar here. you are in this sentence saying that mathematics is a description and something else. "property" is vague. is "property" something real?

>numbers have nothing to do with laws and correlations

numbers define correlation, first of all. correlation is given credence depending on its numerical value (from -1 to 1). i would also argue that laws, in the sense you mean the word, is also defined by numbers. a law like the speed of light is surely an example of what you had in mind. without a number, we don't have the speed.

or were you being sarcastic

[Anonymous No.6972094]

>>6971301

die in a fire

>>6971351

u g h

>>6971382

jesus..

[Anonymous No.6972115]

>>6971284
Someone tells you that philosophy is useless. What's your best reply to BTFO them?

[Anonymous No.6972119]

>>6972115
>nuh uh

[Anonymous No.6972123]

>>6972115
nothing because you are just giving them a motive to believe that the only utility of it is to sound smart.

[Anonymous No.6972138]

>>6972115
What value is there in responding to someone that already had their mind made up like that?

[Anonymous No.6972140]

>>6972013

Why anyone would want to read Mein Kampf is beyond me. Hitler is infamous for being the shittiest author of the 20th century, the man couldn't string together a coherent sentence if his life depended on it. The books is a waste of time, you're much better off reading good secondary lit.

An annotated version will come out in Germany rather soon, I'll probably look into it, but since I've read most of it I don't think there'll be much new information.

>>6972064

How are those two even comparable?

Mein Kampf is about Hitler's personal reasons for hating the Jews and about "Lebensraum im Osten", which essentially means murdering all subhumans (in this case Slavs) in order to have room for the Third Reich to grow.

Communism doesn't has been abused by politians in power to murder millions of people, but clearly this never was Marx's or Lenin's intention.

Hitler on the other hand clearly stated that killing the Jews, the disabled, gays, political enemies, Sinti and Roma and all other "inferior" races is a Necessity. Tell me again how they're comparable?

[Anonymous No.6972157]

>>6972094
Go to reddit if you want positive acknowledgement of your echo chamber circlejerk whining bullshit.

[Anonymous No.6972162]

>>6972140
>Sinti and Roma
Oh, how sensitive and open minded of you. It must be nice to live far away from gypsies, so you can pity them in a lofty manner.

[Anonymous No.6972166]

>>6972162
back to your holding pen

[Anonymous No.6972172]

>>6972140
>Why anyone would want to read Mein Kampf is beyond me
not because it's good but to get a view at the thought process of a very influential historical person. I've read it in German and it is indeed extremely shit and incoherent but it can be a valuable read anyways

>tfw inherited some original WW2 era literature describing the ideal society of the third reich from grandma

[Anonymous No.6972173]

>>6971301
>Basically women in a nutshell: I want you to have cool interests, but not an interest that you like so much you will put it above me.
They struggle against that, but they love drama so much that they don't really want to win.

[Anonymous No.6972180]

>>6972162
to be fair people who live far away from gypsies live with muslims

[Anonymous No.6972191]

>>6972180
Which is more tolerable? I don't think I've met a gypsy

[Anonymous No.6972204]

>>6971430
SUDO!

[Anonymous No.6972207]

>>6972162

I come from a small town in Bavaria and I grew up with people from Turkey, Belarus, all kinds of middle eastern origin and yes, Sinti and Roma. A lot of the old people that live here are still scared whenever they knock, because they think they'll get scammed.

Right now I live in a shitty city in eastern Germany, less than one kilometer away from the refugee camp. They're everywhere, it's pretty okay to be honest.

It is also to note that I never "pitied" gipsies, I do not see their lifes as "pityful".

Your style of posting is very revealing, you might want to work on that.

What now? What now, Jimmie?..

[Anonymous No.6972229]

>>6972172

I fully understand that, though I think there's some great secondary lit that actually works with the source material and features most of the content of Mein Kampf. Fair enough.

>>6972173
>>6971301

It honestly makes me sad that there are people without intelligent women in their lifes. How lonely and detached must you feel - clinging on to the thought of one's own superiority and the notion that there cannot ever be a woman that can hold a candle to you.

It'll get better, don't worry. Once you get a little older, start leaving the house to actually meet people and make an effort to indulge in Their interests, maybe, just maybe, you could start becoming decent human beings.

[Anonymous No.6972246]

>>6971351
This is actually a really accurate pic for 'those people'. Well meme'd, my friend.

[Anonymous No.6972248]

>>6972229
>indulge in Their interests

>candy crush
>posting pics of cocktails on facebook
>netflix
thanks but I'll pass

I'll gladly take them with me to my kind of activities though

[Anonymous No.6972255]

>>6971284

>I don't care so much about the books, it's more the quantity. I can't stand clutter and if you're someone that has dozens of books, it makes me nervous and want to throw stuff away. Some people collect books, which I get, but... it makes me and my 15-book collection too anxious

[Anonymous No.6972263]

>>6972191
Muslims. Hell, even blacks are tolerable in comparison.

>>6972207
Well, Bob, I continue being shamelessly judgmental and selfish. I'm sure you'd make an excellent secretary.

[Anonymous No.6972272]

>>6972255
I'd like to bring this girl to a library and watch her have a nervous breakdown

[Anonymous No.6972275]

>>6972229
the nature of the woman is too hedonistic by to become something else

[Anonymous No.6972292]

>>6971351
actually not bad lists tbh not perfect but not exactly the worst at all

[Anonymous No.6972297]

>you will never have an overweight redditor gf

[Anonymous No.6972303]

>>6972115

Herd them back into their stall and make sure to lock the gate this time

[Anonymous No.6972308]

>>6972255
>my 15-book collection

>Fifty shades of grey, all 3 books plus the one that came after plus the movie edition
>five john green books
>two chick flicks about a girl on holiday in spain falling in love with a beach watch named Pablo

[Anonymous No.6972310]

>>6972248
>>6972275

Who are you describing? High school teenagers? I'm sorry, but this board is 18+

If you Legitimately have not met a female deeply interested in art, literature, music, philosophy & others you're either underage or you literally never leave your house. All 4chan sarcasm thrown away, I actually mean this. It doesn't matter what hellhole you live in, there will always be an intelligent female in (relative) proximity.

>>6972263

>I'm sure you'd make an excellent secretary.

I appreciate it.

[Anonymous No.6972316]

>>6972297
1. Kidnap a young girl by giving her candy
2. Keep feeding her candy until she gets fat
3. Show her reddit on her iPhone 69 S+

There you go

[Anonymous No.6972323]

>>6972310
>If you Legitimately have not met a female deeply interested in art, literature, music, philosophy & others
are these girls fantasies of your mind?
where do you live?

I'm not joking I'm mid twenties and most girls I know are the type I described, almost all highly educated

[Anonymous No.6972325]

>>6972115

Say "well your DICK is useless" and then kick them as hard as I can in the nads

[Anonymous No.6972329]

>>6972255
>>6972308
This is the most perfect description of a philistine I've ever seen. Bravo.

[Anonymous No.6972458]

>>6972323

>are these girls fantasies of your mind?

Do you honestly believe that there are no girls with a legitimate interest in literature in the entire world? Have you ever heard of Woold or Plath? What about De Beauvoir? What about all the girls posting on here?

I live in Germany, grew up in Bavaria and live alone in Saxony now.

Anecdotal evidence is useless, but since you asked. The University is horrible for Humanities, it is entirely technical , yet there are still a lot of smart girls.

Few weeks ago I met a girl from Syria. She'd read all of Nietzsche, we talked about Rumi and Dickons and Shakespeare and Márquez. We had similiar reading background in philosophy and psychology so there was plenty to talk about.

On my Europe trip I was couchsurfing in Croatia. The guy I visited was a film buff, friends of his were the hosts of a festival. I ended up "interviewing" the curator and got in touch with his cute friends. While we were out drinking until blackout two of the girls (I liked them most) would constantly correct me when I mentioned something about Heidegger or Nietzsche. They were pretty clearly more well-read than I was, but still really humble. The one girl I ended up talking to longer, turned out she was into neofolk and free jazz, had seen all of Bela Tarr and pretty much every single movie I mentioned to her. Lovely people.

Of course then there's also the greatest of all - my girl. I remember mentioning Dosto's "The Gambler", because a friend asked me about what I read last and her eyes got insanely big. When everyone at the party was asleep she cuddled up next to me and we started talking, it ended up taking almost seven hours. I've never been this happy in my entire life, the feeling of being able to share your thoughts with someone who really understands is inexplicable, it's the best thing in the entire world.

I don't want to blog anymore or go on a namedropping rant. I don't want to paint my acquaintances as "vltimate patricians", I just want to show you that these women do exist and that they can and will turn your entire life around.

My gf likes Mucha and Klimt, her favorite movie is The Wizard of Oz (the 1939 version), her favorite author is probably Grass.

Wish you the best for you future.

[Anonymous No.6972487]

>>6972458
i want the normies to leave.

[Anonymous No.6972507]

>>6972458
>Of course then there's also the greatest of all - my girl.
Stopped reading right here.

[Anonymous No.6972538]

>>6972115
"wrong move kid"
*grab him by the neck*
*SNAP!*
"psh, nothing personnel kid"

[Anonymous No.6972562]

>>6972487

I've probably been here for longer than you have. Pretty okay with being a "normie" to be honest.

>>6972507

Did you not detect the obvious sarcasm or is it just the thought that people on here actually have relationships that made you stop? Genuinly curious.

[Anonymous No.6972577]

>>6972487
>im such a special snowflake

[Anonymous No.6972584]

>>6972458
these people should be shot tbh

[Anonymous No.6972600]

By all means, marry. If you get a good wife, you'll become happy; if you get a bad one, you'll become a philosopher.

Socrates

[Anonymous No.6972624]

>>6972458
>this girl is smart because she has read nietzche

ok

[Anonymous No.6972645]

>>6972303

Kek

[Anonymous No.6972651]

>>6972624
>feeling the need to post a reply
>but you make it blatantly shit

pretend its ironic for damage control, so you can protect your anonymous identity

[Anonymous No.6972666]

>>6972562
>Did you not detect the obvious sarcasm
Not him, but I didn't either. It may not be as obvious as you think it is.

[Anonymous No.6972881]

>>6971351
Both have good taste.

[Anonymous No.6973054]

>>6971876
Why would you read something you don't already agree with?

[Anonymous No.6973078]

>>6971919
Mathematics is uncannily useful, but I don't think I'd make such an overreaching claim.

[Anonymous No.6973091]

>>6971284
>I'll just put it this way: I've attended a lot of talks by Lawrence Krauss.
that's like criticizing science from Deepak Chopra's point of view

[Anonymous No.6973096]

>>6972094
LONDON
O
N
D
O
N

[Anonymous No.6973099]

>>6972090
Numbers having nothing to do w/ either laws or correlations, whilst wrong, says nothing of whether a number is Real, in some sense. Vague question, every time I've heard it.

[Anonymous No.6973112]

>>6972162
>>Sinti and Roma
those are simply ethnic descriptions, no? he also did scare-quote inferior to almost certainly imply that he thought such ethnicities were only thought to be inferior by Hitler and his acolytes and not him personally.
you're being a cuck.

[Anonymous No.6973122]

>>6972275
STOP WITH THIS MEME IMAGE UGH

[Anonymous No.6973139]

>>6972115
tell them that the only reason they think in utilitarian terms is because of philosophy

[Anonymous No.6973141]

>>6972624
not only had the girls read him, they knew and understood enough to correct his mistakes when he made them.

[Anonymous No.6973187]

>>6973091
It's like her saying, "btw I have this lousy opinion just based on this". I don't know how to feel about the combination of honesty and blatant disregard for trying to make a coherent opinion.

[Anonymous No.6973211]

>>6972458
>The trend is invalid because of muh anecdotal evidence
If you want to confront the trend, show where the trend is inaccurate because the burden of proof is on your side.

[Anonymous No.6973282]

>>6972458
>well read girls that study humanities and drink themselves to blackout in Croatia that understand literature
Brate, ne seri

[Anonymous No.6973368]

>>6973282
>Svaba nasao neke kurave koje citaju i napalio se.
Zasto mislis da sere?

[Anonymous No.6973384]

>>6971297
>evidence of the contrary
Let me guess, that's empirical SCIENTIFIC evidence? Huh, science doesn't want to say it's worthless? Imagine that.

[Anonymous No.6973386]

Krauss is an idiot in the most literal sense of that term. There is no reason to take anything he says about philosophy seriously, let alone anything one of his little layman acolytes regurgitates.

I don't know why we keep having this conversation.

[Anonymous No.6973397]

>>6971919
Mathematics isn't a description of the universe nor does it try to be. It is simply a language, an entirely human affair, not some natural artifact.

As a language it is in many ways more precise than ordinary language but not in exact accordance with itself and not with reality. Why else would paradoxes appear?

You may find oneness or separateness in mathematics because it is possible to imagine these concepts, but you do not find separateness or oneness in the real world. Likewise we can in ordinary language make statements that are not so in the world.

[Anonymous No.6973674]

>>6971284
What annoys me about science in a general sense is it tries to answer questions it has no business answering. Science thinks it is philosophy but it is not, and can not answer questions outside of the natural and observable world. It is an idea imprinted by the Author of Nature, and one that is often taken to such circuitous lengths as to practically lose meaning. I'll just put it this way: I've attended a lot of talks by George Berkeley.

[Anonymous No.6974423]

>Here's my personal bias: If all I see is philosophy and economics, theory, political science, non-fiction...If there's no fiction and it just looks like an academic library--I make 2 assumptions--
>(1) the book owner has a chip on his/her shoulder about being smart or appearing smart;
>(2) the book owner doesn't actually like reading.
>Basically, a well-curated collection of philosophy works actually counts against you in my book--unless it's balanced with some comic books or something.

>unless it's balanced with some comic books or something.

More like, I'm insecure about my own intelligence wah!

[Anonymous No.6974438]

>>6971919
TOP KEKEKE

[Anonymous No.6974918]

>>6972458
You and all your friends sound like insufferable faggots and all of you deserve to be dosed with a load of buckshot through the teeth.

[Anonymous No.6974956]

>>6971301
fucking word

[Anonymous No.6974973]

>>6971351
I don't think I've ever agreed with either side in one of these pictures no matter what they're talking about.

[Anonymous No.6975129]

>>6974973

[Anonymous No.6975145]

>>6971284
>Yeah. If somebody has Mein Kampf, who knows. If they have him and Evola and Carlyle, possibly run screaming.
(If they have post WWII Evola, and no Nazis, proceed with caution.)

What's up with this post? It seems like she (or maybe he) is just blatantly trying to show she knows stuph aboot buks. And Carlyle is just awkward in that list next to evola and hitler.

[Anonymous No.6975156]

>>6971284
Phil is probably the worst study. Bunch of tenured retards waving their faux-intellectual cocks around trying to one-up eachother arguing about shit that ultimatelt doesn't matter.

It's for people who are insecure about their intelligence.

[Anonymous No.6975166]

>>6971594
>Agora
English isn't my first language; should this really be with a capital A?

[Anonymous No.6975170]

>>6971382
>extreme political views
>Books that show an extreme attitude, be it political, religious, economical or others. Someone with 20 books on communism looks like a left-extremist, someone with 10 books about communism and 10 books about capitalism looks like an open minded and politically interested person.

Jesus, what's wrong with having an unorthodox (or rather unmild) political view? It's like if you're not some detatched, too cool 4 anyone mildly political person you're a looney.
What a world

[Anonymous No.6975174]

>>6971382
>look askance

kek

seriously though some of the greatest works of art ever made require an understanding of religion and religious metaphors and allusions

also isn't rejecting people solely based off of their religious preferences an inherently extremist view?

[Anonymous No.6975181]

>>6971802
By your post it might be implyed that you are not christian, and if you are im going to act like youre not for the sake of this post.
So you are a non chrsitian with christian theological books on your shelf and so she shouldnt judge you on having them because it doesnt mean you are a christian, a horrible funDIE or whatever. But its also an issue if you were to have those books and were to be a christian. Why the fuck is she judging you for being a christian with a knowledge of theology? Hell isnt that "better" than an uneducated christian? But the problem is she thinks it bad youre chrsitian, which is gay af fam.

[Anonymous No.6975209]

>>6975156
Didn't even major in Phil, but at my university the professors I had were super based. I went to Tufts and would see Dan Dennett pick up his mail at the same time every day during one of my classes. Several professors are engaged in serious cognitive research. We've got George Smith, a logician/aerospace engineer we poached from MIT after a departmental dispute over the rigour of his Intro Logic course, and his course is considered one of the toughest in the entire university. Even the junior professors who teach things like Philosophy of Biology do it in such a way that it shapes the futures of the science majors who take it because it engages with the big ideas behind the field in a way that resonates with those versed in the specifics. Honestly, the philosophers have the largest positive impact on the community relative to their numbers of any department.

Perhaps it is you who's insecure about intelligence because you went to a shitty cow college where the philosophy professors weren't worth spit.

[Anonymous No.6975234]

>>6975145
>Carlyle
He was an evil racist that defended slavery.
Also sexist because he didn't include a woman in his Heroes lectures.

[Anonymous No.6975251]

>>6975170
This.

[Anonymous No.6975268]

>>6973187

>combination of honesty and blatant disregard for trying to make a coherent opinion

Sounds like Reddit.

[Anonymous No.6975299]

>>6971284
>I can imagine that's what a lot of the conversations we will have will involve and that will frustrate me

bc ur dum

[Anonymous No.6975308]

>>6971314

> marriage

[Anonymous No.6975370]

>>6973368
Jer znam ekipu s filozofskog.

[Anonymous No.6975400]

>>6973139
this tbh

[Anonymous No.6975415]

Why do these people assume that if you have a book on your shelf you must agree with it? That seems to be the assumption. Just because i have Mein Kampf on my shelf doesn't mean i'm a Nazi.

[Anonymous No.6975424]

>>6975415
only weak-minded people think this
basically everything that they read or put in their life seeps into their beliefs because they cannot think for themselves

so don't worry about the people who tell you off

[Anonymous No.6975442]

>>6972115
*unzips katana
*teleports behinds u
*cuts u in half
*lights up a smoke

[Anonymous No.6975447]

Science is literally the most stupid thing there is.

[Anonymous No.6975449]

>>6975447
*tips bandana

[Anonymous No.6975475]

Was this posted on badphilosophy already?

[Anonymous No.6975553]

Philosophy needs a new threefold division; ethics, politics, and psychology.

Ethics as the Kantian resolution to metaphysical problems of course.

But also the introduction of philosophers as social critics, poets, and authors to influence politics; the mechanisms of human relationship in the world, and psychology; the mechanisms of individual human consciousness as experiencing the world.

This is where I see philosophy headed.

[Anonymous No.6975578]

>>6972458
>a girl from Syria. She'd read all of Nietzsche
She could even have read all of Nietzsche in reverse. Did she tell you why she's read him? Or what conclusions she's drawn reading him so far? Or did you just talk about semantic evocations you happen to like comparable to watching a picture because of its colors used?
You can read Nietzsche and other continental philosophers only for aesthetic pleasure, for your own joy. You can draw conclusions off of it without relevance to the text written but only with associations invoked by your fantasy. People do that, girls do that. Were you able to specify why she read Nietzsche or why your other girls read this and that? Try to look beyond the facade, don't get impressed by namedropping and her physical look. Memorization and association are basic cognitive operations. Humans can train these and can achieve mastery in them, however, this doesn't mean that people who are well trained in these can actually form compelling and sound arguments about their thinking.

[Anonymous No.6975660]

>>6972458

you are completely deluded if you actually think that your gf took interest in you because of just reading The Gambler

how come someone so literate could be so stupid srs

Omni i know this is you, just kill yourself already

[Anonymous No.6975673]

>>6975553
What about linguistic/analytic philosophy?

[Anonymous No.6975683]

>>6975673

[Anonymous No.6975751]

>>6975442
Virgil?

[Anonymous No.6975855]

what the fuck how people can still think that woman are the same as men and that they can have the same intentions when choosing hobbies?

it's 2015 and people still believe in so childish laws jesus christ

[Anonymous No.6975922]

>>6972310
Speaking as someone married to an intelligent girl, what you say is bullshit. Sometimes it's pure coincidence meeting a girl who you find actually good enough. I've also yet to meet one from my own country.

[Anonymous No.6976370]

>>6975660
Im not the other guy but i would think that he doesnt think she was attracted to him because of reading either. But if there was some qt and she was being pretty cool and then she shows she is a reader of good shit thatd id be pretty interested.
Not trying to defend that anonymous fuckboy just defending my dream ;(

[Anonymous No.6976411]

>>6972005
Is this true?

[Anonymous No.6976450]

>>6973139
p gud

[Anonymous No.6976821]

>>6975673

[Anonymous No.6976908]

>>6972115
you can't know nuffin

[Anonymous No.6976939]

>>6971919
it always amazes me that there are people with brains that believe this

[Anonymous No.6976952]

>>6972115
Yeah, you're absolutely right. It got me laid more than once, tho. Chicks dig my existential Dee.

[Anonymous No.6976962]

Cherry picked comments from 4chan would make this place seem a lot worse than reddit.

[Anonymous No.6977016]

Science and philosophy go hand in hand and always have. This thread shouldn't be about women or men, rather it should be about the stupidity of Reddit. That woman is stupid. But everyone on Reddit is stupid. A woman here would be more intelligent. Sex and gender have nothing to do with this.

[Anonymous No.6977263]

What's with all the mentions of atlas shrugged?
I've never read it; is it that shit?

[Anonymous No.6977271]

>>6977263
It's not very good. However reddit doesn't like it because it triggers them. Most of them admit to not having read it in that thread (is that they call them on reddit?)

[Anonymous No.6977281]

>>6977271
What do you think triggers them about it?

[Anonymous No.6977325]

>>6971284
>dianetics
>PUA stuff
>Mein Kampf depending on context
>evola and other conservative writers depending on context
>sarah palin
>ayn rand

I scrolled through about 1/3 of the comments and saw nothing against philosophy. In fact I judge the same people the same way.

>A person can be interested in philosophy and that's fine by me, and I do think philosophy has its place. But if your bookshelf has dozens of philosophy books then I can imagine that's what a lot of the conversations we will have will involve and that will frustrate me.

Nobody really gives a fuck about you. You should learn to accept that.

[Anonymous No.6977346]

>>6971284
>>6977325
Dude I just refreshed the page and the comment you posted doesn't exist.

Fuck off anti-philofag. Nobody cares what you like and don't like.

>>8ch.net

[Anonymous No.6977466]

>>6971379
Go on.

[Anonymous No.6977560]

>>6977281
its philosophy is that you should you should be selfish, to put it into simple words. But since ayn rand is a stupid pleb, she puts it into a really dumb way which makes it much more lmae and vulgar than something like nietzsche or stirner or something.