/lit/ - Literature

I will continue.

Mr Leary makes no attempt at connecting his concepts. They are thrown together, in an entirely solipsistic manner, resulting in a mindless mash of nonsense, which is totally unworthy of being treated as an “argument” for anything at all.

An entirely ignorant babble from an incredibly cloudy and confused mind.

1. The author (who I am assuming is also OP) has made no attempt to define his terms (“reasonable”, “lower quality of life” etc).
2. Going by the common meanings of aforementioned terms, which is a hazy business in itself, leads to an even more hazy picture being produced, where concepts are thrown around carelessly without a care for justification or logical argument.

It was awful. I can only hope that Mr Leary develops some kindling of sentience, hopefully pushing from his futile ramblings and into something more suited for his abilities.

>>19877800
>nietzsche was a jew lover.
No, he wasn't, you idiot. There's a difference between being a Jew-lover and being a Jew-hater. It just so happens that slave-moralists morons, such as yourself, can't seem to understand that the world isn't divided into "good and evil". LOL. Idiot.

>>19713865
Style is impressionism, medium is oil on canvas.

>>19706035
Yeah, that's right, sit down and submit to your superior. You miserable little dog.

>>19706065
>Only downside is the books I like aren't in print and semi-expensive, and I gotta buy two.
Everyone, gather around! The books that this poster likes are semi-expensive and out-out-print! And he has to buy TWO copies, one for him and the other for his girlfriend! Isn't he so cool? Isn't that just so interesting?
I somehow feel as if I've been incredibly enlightened by the sharing of this piece of personal information. I really can't imagine my life without it. Such a necessary addition to the thread.

OP isn't cut out for any task more complicated than picking his nose.

Wow, that's so cool, anon! I can't put into words how grateful I am to have the privilege of reading a thread concerning the gender of the authors in your to-read list. And I'm sure the rest of the board agrees with me! It's just so interesting. You must be a really important person for us to care about this so much.
And of course, everything I've stated above was a lie. No one gives a shit. You are disgusting idiot. You should slice your wrists. Your self-absorbed foolishness has killed a thread, a thread which was guaranteed to hold more value than this. Get cancer.

You should make your own group of committed individuals instead of whining about it.

Slice your throat, you worthless dog.

Bump, because I’m reading “The End of Morality” and might give a rundown if I end up finishing it. Which is unlikely, as, so far, it has been utter dogshit.

In general, technology is already the main contributor to the descension of literature in society. The development of AI (which will grow at an exponential rate) will have until societal consequences - we will potentially witness the death of literature (which might end up being the least of our concerns).

However, in the near future we may gain technologies such as advanced proof-reading technology. AI will grow ever skilful at being able to replicate human works, which will be interesting (I doubt that this specific skill will be the reason behind the death of literature).

>>19690807
I'm aware that state capitalism is a "necessary sacrifice" on the road to communism, but do you believe that the government will wilfully hand over their power when the time comes to do so? And how long would it take to get to such a time in the first place? I'd imagine that world domination would be necessary?

And good post. I've almost never seen anyone state the obvious about wealth accumulation being a necessary precursor for communism; it's usually either idiots completely misunderstanding the system.

>>19690934
>You're writing style is impetuous.
>You're writing style is impetuous.
>You're writing style is impetuous.
AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHHA!!!

>>19690782
Emotional in how I express my disdain for you, yes. And unemotional in my pursuit of objective truth (and opposition to those do not share my passion). I will continue to insult you, because it is the only language that imbeciles such as yourself can understand.

Moralists are the most stupid, insufferable, ignorant, clueless, frustrating idiots to walk the face of the planet. And I do not exaggerate here.

>>19689027
Is "The End of Morality" a decent read? Or is it just the most basic form of common-sense directed at braindead dimwits? I'm presuming the latter.

>>19690632
>Do you not see the irony behind your post, when that infographic is spammed all over this site by emotional /pol/tards trying to combat >muh trannies muh jews?
Yes, dumbshit, I'm more than aware of that. But that does, in no way, contradict anything I have said. Idiot.

>>19690623
I attack the post, not "you".

>>19690092
What the actual fuck are you doing?

>>19690579
His reading comprehension is dogshit and he has an emotional motive behind his position. Just leave him be, you won't be able to remove him from his delusions.

It's hilarious that OP thinks that he's "discovered" something with this. But in reality, it's his own ignorance and inability to comprehend complexities that has led him to his delusions.

Predictably, seeing as this board is comprised of dimwits whose response to a failure of high school mathematics is a desperate clinging to literature (as an attempt for "academic redemption"), the topic of maths results in extreme levels seething.
In particular, threads such as this one, which promote the necessity of mathematical skill in dealing with the study of philosophy, are bound to threaten the aforementioned dimwits with a destruction of their delusions.
The fact of the matter is that anyone unable to succeed in mathematics will be unable to succeed in either understanding of creating philosophy. The natural conclusion of this is that a VERY small percentage of this board is able to comprehend and debate philosophy, resulting in an extreme amount of bullshit and next to no productive discussion.

>>19688805
Idiot.
It actually pains me to see how ignorant people are. But, at the same time, it's sort of funny (in an absurd and hopeless kind of way).

Almost guaranteed that it will be awful, like almost anything to come out of this place. Alternatively, you'll give up before finishing.

>>19688578
And here, at exhibit A, we have "The Clueless Spewer". He spends his life spewing his worthless and emotional opinions on the internet, with no attempt made at understanding or actually conveying anything of value.
Worthless piece of shit.