/lit/ - Literature

I'm in.

>destructive and violent, tearing down things he don't understand
110 dropped to 85-95 after chemical exposure

>>12425224
Me too and I'm 19

>>12250080
Industrial Society And Its Future
Technological Slavery
Anti-Tech Revolution: Why and How

>>12239406
Industrial Society And Its Future
Technological Slavery
Anti-Tech Revolution: Why and How

no book will help you with this.
The internet is not the answer to your problems it IS your problem.
disconnect
throw your laptop out the window.
smash the desktop with a hammer
give your smartphone to a homeless person.

free yourself from the advanced-industrial mind-set

What books discuss similar topics as he did in his manifesto?
I really liked his points against technological evolution.

>>11412472
>>11412081
>>11413307
Thanks all

What does /lit/ think of Ted's writings?

i've been expecting you

>>11183626
>has an interest in technology and civilization
>apolitical
you could say that yeah

My confusing one-day ban for posting excerpts from Kazcynski's recent books has just expired. In celebration, can we talk about the writings of radical, non-mainstream critics of modernity?

Kaczynski's writings impress me, especially the recent anthologies, because he has a systemic view of the effects of technology/bourgeois society on human existence, in the way that Heidegger does. He never really talks about one-to-one simplistic causes, like a lot of low-rent social critics, but about the effects of technology as a whole, making up an entire way of life and structuring society and our basic interactions with reality.

Also I've heard that Kaczynski is derivative of Ellul, but how true is this really?

>>10964661
I don't think there's really any way to disagree with him. The question is really just how feasible are his solutions.

>>10722660
Civilisation is a lie. You feel depressed because to be a modern "man" is to be an enslaved beast, trapped in a cage, fed distractions. Spend some time outside, go for long walks in nature, practise some traditional skills. Learn what you are, not what civilisation is forcing you to pretend to be. Also, I recommend /out/, /diy/ and /fit/.

>>10544593
THE MOTIVES OF SCIENTISTS
87. Science and technology provide the most important examples of surrogate activities. Some scientists claim that they are motivated by “curiosity” or by a desire to “benefit humanity.” But it is easy to see that neither of these can be the principal motive of most scientists. As for “curiosity,” that notion is simply absurd. Most scientists work on highly specialized problems that are not the object of any normal curiosity. For example, is an astronomer, a mathematician or an entomologist curious about the properties of isopropyltrimethylmethane? Of course not. Only a chemist is curious about such a thing, and he is curious about it only because chemistry is his surrogate activity. Is the chemist curious about the appropriate classification of a new species of beetle? No. That question is of interest only to the entomologist, and he is interested in it only because entomology is his surrogate activity. If the chemist and the entomologist had to exert themselves seriously to obtain the physical necessities, and if that effort exercised their abilities in an interesting way but in some nonscientific pursuit, then they wouldn’t give a damn about isopropyltrimethylmethane or the classification of beetles. Suppose that lack of funds for postgraduate education had led the chemist to become an insurance broker instead of a chemist. In that case he would have been very interested in insurance matters but would have cared nothing about isopropyltrimethylmethane. In any case it is not normal to put into the satisfaction of mere curiosity the amount of time and effort that scientists put into their work. The “curiosity” explanation for the scientists’ motive just doesn’t stand up.
88. The “benefit of humanity” explanation doesn’t work any better. Some scientific work has no conceivable relation to the welfare of the human race—most of archaeology or comparative linguistics for example. Some other areas of science present obviously dangerous possibilities. Yet scientists in these areas are just as enthusiastic about their work as those who develop vaccines or study air pollution. Consider the case of Dr. Edward Teller, who had an obvious emotional involvement in promoting nuclear power plants. Did this involvement stem from a desire to benefit humanity? If so, then why didn’t Dr. Teller get emotional about other “humanitarian” causes? If he was such a humanitarian then why did he help to develop the H- bomb? As with many other scientific achievements, it is very much open to question whether nuclear power plants actually do benefit humanity. Does the cheap electricity outweigh the accumulating waste and the risk of accidents? Dr. Teller saw only one side of the question. Clearly his emotional involvement with nuclear power arose not from a desire to “benefit humanity” but from a personal fulfillment he got from his work and from seeing it put to practical use.

>>10411572
papa ted has the answer you seek

I've been reading some of his works and I think he is mostly right about the dangers of technology and late-capitalism/post-modernism. Also a friend told me to watch Texhnolyze and read into the Mouse Utopia experiments, so I've been getting more and more troubled about where we are heading.

However, he isn't exactly the best writer so I'd like to read something along the sames lines from a different author. I know about Nick Land, but I would have to read Deleuze and Guattari to get what he is trying to say and I don't agree with accelerationism per se.

Use thus as a Nick Land thread if you will, those are quite interesting too. As long as I get a few recommendations I'd be thankful.