Are there any writers that deal with the lack of alignment between beliefs and actions and whether they are sincere beliefs if you don't act on them.
For example: I believe that I should, say, be sincerely loving and attentive when interacting with people but usually I am seemingly uncontrollably disinterested and mean spirited.
This seems like it might be what Kierkegaard talks about when dealing with subjective truth but maybe I'm off.
Any writers/books that deal with this ideas and how to stop/mitigate this interminable dissonance
What's the most unsettling book you've read?
Open the next book that's closest to you, turn to page 23 and post the first sentence.
The next book, meaning not the first book closest to me but the second.
>Nous faisons tous un état des lieux quand nous entrons dans un nouveau logement, pourquoi ne pas faire un état des liens?
/lit/ is a slow board, think before you decide to kill a thread by making a new one.
Need a book rec and too stupid to check the wiki? Ask here.
Have a banal question and can't use google? Ask here.
Have a question that you won't think will generate much discussion? Ask here.
i'm 22. just worked after high school, always had it in my mind to go back to school but the past four years just flew by and now i am regretting not going sooner. i want to go to a great books school to study the classics/philosophy, but they are mostly four year majors with no transfers from cc availible, which means i'll be going in with a bunch of 18 year olds. i regret not going when i was younger so much, but i can't change that now. do you have any suggestions for what to do in my situation/where to go to school?
go in the summer semesters. fewer wankers, more older people, and smaller classes. By your third year you can go to regular classes because all the retards have been hopefully filtered out.
Just kill yourself. It's too late. You will never have that great college experience you picture now. You could have gone after high school and made long lasting friends and memories. You could be independent with a great job doing what you love right now if you had gone. Now you'll be entering the proessional workforce at 27. If you go you'll be the weird old guy on campus. People will look at you funny when they find out yolu aren't in grad school. You'll be isoated and depressed. Just kill yourself now to save the embarassement.
Just picked up all these at a library sale for 15$
Also got these at a local bookstore for 11 dollars. God bless used books
Do people who study philosophy on rigorous academic level actually read this guy? Or is he more popular with dilettantes
REAL men read analytics and are politically conservative. It's based in logic and rationality
Only effeminate Bernouts read continental cuckery. They aren't real men. It's based in muh feels and muh oppreshun
Please confine all John Green hate to this thread. Thank you.
Has anyone here ever visited John Green Stadium in Thames, London?
Didn't see a critique thread, so here I go
And remember kids: If someone posts something but does not give any critique to someone else, ignore the fag
Since i'm first i'll give critique later
It was a cold July evening, and Montag walked slowly through the sidewalk. The sky was orange, almost night. Near where he walked, there were a small group of people sitting around a metal canister full of fuel, and lit. One of them, excitingly were telling a story, to which the others attentively listened. Near them was a stray dog, sleeping. Scenes like this were common, small families enjoying the evening to warm themselves and have fun. They weren't real families, of blood, but small groups of people living together, separated from other people. Montag also were part of a family, but a big one, living together in a fixed place. Some could say that the way they lived was "communist", but that is debatable. They all liveed together, each in charge of a specific job to benefit the whole family. Montag was in charge of hunting, to get food for the family. Even though he weren't the only, he went alone that day.
Although most of the population lived in that way, that is, without a leader or group of leaders, fact that characterizes anarchism, some still lived in groups with leaders, but they were small, not remarkable, groups, practically unnoticed by most people.
The anarchism was installed in this country (and when I say country, I refer to the geographic localization, a chunk of land divided by natural or artificial borders) after an insurgency. Previously, the state imposed a dictatorship, which lasted several years. A rebel group, with many divisions throughout the country, organized an attack to the main points of power of the state, overthrowing the dictator and other big figures. Afterwards, they utilized a very smart method to completely eliminate leaders. Utilizing strong propaganda, through news, radio, and television, they stimulated the population, who for years nurtured strong hatred towards leaders, to attack every figure that represented power near them. The propagand was just the initial impulse, basically some kind of "permission" given by the insurgents, since everyone had at least a single reason to hate their leaders and executioners. Some, because they lost dear friends and family to the state assassins, others, for being separated, and some simply because of the lack of freedom of expression and action. Soon, what followed was grotesque carnage and savagery . The leaders, who used to hang rebels in public square, were scourged and humiliated by the people. Some, crueler, after days of torture, burned them publicly, to the joy of the people. All these acts, so absurd and inhumane, even today aren't briefly mentioned by those who participated. They fear themselves for what they did.
Although the coup d'etat was well planned and executed, before and after there was great confusion. Firstly, what would be done after the elimination of the state? Never had them witnessed such fact. The masses believed that, following the example of other overthrown dictators, the republic would be installed and they'd live like other countries. But the insurgents wouldn't allow such fact. They didn't elect a new presidents, but installed anarchy. The main reasons for anarchy to be chosen are still confusing even today. If you ask some, they'd say that anarchy was chosen because it is the natural state of men. Respectfully, I deny this affirmation and teach them what I think to be true.
The main reasons were, the ignorance and excitation of everyone towards the debunked state. After so many years imprisoned, living like birds in cages, controlled by the totalitarian state, the growing chorela towards the powerful minority led to a blind and ignorant hate. When you hate all kind of power, the inexistence of a form of power seems to be the perfect thought. Soon, blind by the thought of living free, they installed anarchy, and abhorred those who wished for order in society. Nevertheless, as the Grand Inquisitor said, "Nothing has ever been more insupportable for a man and a human society than freedom".
"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."
What did he mean by this?
You know what's funny? The image of reading as an "old man's hobby".
This couldn't be further from the truth, however. The worst time to read in your life is when you're old, because your attention span has rotted to shit by then.
Your physiology all over has decayed, and that includes the amount of dope your brain can pump out, and that affects how long you can isolate your attention on one thing.
Reading is possibly the most attention-intensive task there is. You can't enjoy a novel when you're reading in 20-second...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Nature+Nurture determines everything.
Yeah, they haven't fried themselves by pounding down coffees, taking huge bong hits, and playing CoD and Halo while checking social media in between matches for entire summers at a time.
However, they're old. Their forms have been alive longer than these albeit attention-deficit youngsters, and that "nature" factor weighs more heavily than the likely temporary damage (sometimes permanent, I'm not arguing that) youngins have done to their...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>forget the main point of it only a few months later
Anyone else get this feel? I would take notes and write in the margins but this really irritates me, and I read multiple books at once so my notes would get all out of track.
You know that wonderful empty page in the very end of the book? After reading any book I fill that page with everything fascinating i've found about it, including insights from critical articles, so i have a mini recap of the plot and ideas. Once I open that page, it usually all comes back and I can almost completely recall what the book was about.
I just finished my freshmen year as an English major. Is getting my BA in English worth it or should I switch tracks.
pic related is my favorite book
is this worth readin /lit/?