Literally the best existentialist work ever written, philosophy or literature.
>>7429602
>Literally the first existentialist work I ever read, philosophy or literature.
ftfy op
is this the underage readers who just came from r/books containment thread?
>>7429602
No. This is.
>>7429602
Houellebecq better and more relevant.
Heidegger. Sartre et al are humanists who don't take existentialism seriously. That is, they often get sidetracked and miss the point. But Heidegger made many mistakes and presuppositions so it's still important to supplement him with Levinas and the Sartre crowd. Just don't confuse them for the real thing.
For /lit/ I prefer Brothers K (yeah) and The Beautyful Ones Are Not Yet Born (some african fag) over NFU.
>>7429602
I beg to differ
>>7429729
Why do you need God? Just b yourself lmao.
>>7429738
why be yourself when you can just commit suicide? :s
>>7429750
I enjoy coffee too much.
Is being-toward-death all that different than being-toward-God? I mean when you really break it down.
>>7429758
Chekov-lifting faggot.
>>7429758
I still don't get what he meant by that.
Did Camus mean that drinking coffee has the same significance as killing yourself, wat?
>>7429794
Did Chekov write about this? Cool thanks, I'll have to check[ov] him out.
>>7429801
lol xD
>>7429796
Both acts are equally insignificant because life is absurd.
>>7429629
I've read it. There's no way it compares with the depth of the ideas set up in the first ten chapters of Notes from Underground, and the way it explores them is edgy and detached from reality, whereas Notes is about a character who encounters a realistic world in a willfully edgy and detached way.
>>7429846
All of it? The true philosophical exploration doesn't form until the last third of the novel. The first half is very edgy though, agreed.
Why is it seen as juvenile (not just on /lit/ either) to take Dostoevsky seriously? Have only read Brothers K and The Idiot
>>7429858
Because some of those things are scary to some people and mocking it is a way to attempt to diminish it.
>>7429858
It's not. People just have reacted against everyone sucking his literary cock so much on 4chan and reddit, and that they act as if he is more 'literary' than his superior Leo Tolstoy.
>>7429858
Some of his work is fairly well known, he wrote very little non-fiction, in a time before existentialism had become well explored and refined. Pretty much all other respected existentialists authored tons of non-fiction essays.
>>7429854
All of it. Dostoevsky virtually all of Nietzsche's ideas in that little book, save the overman (which he explores in his other work). His story is about real life, and makes you realize how existentialism is an everyday thing.
>>7429858
Mainly because he's too popular and the interpretation is too clear. Once /lit/ reads him enough and can actually have disputes over what "Dostoevsky REALLY meant", then he'd be seen as a genius, because he'd offer intellectual exclusivity (that is why Nietzsche is popular here even though he's mainstream).
>>7429897
*covers virtually
I just downloaded it on my Kindle for free.
I hope you're telling the truth, OP.
Who wants some more Notes - read the Adolescent.
>>7429602
That is the tackiest fucking book cover. Christ, graphic designers are idiots.
ffs the design of book covers attracts some of the best graphic designers too, and penguin is a top name. baka
>>7429602
this >>7429629 is the right one
>>7429854
>The true philosophical exploration doesn't form until the last third of the novel
just wow. you are really fucked my friend. the third part is a emotional excuse and a hurry conclusion.
>>7429629
>>7429995
Seriously underrated for some reason. Probably because he harder to read than Camus.
>>7430002
No, it's the culmination and elaboration of all the ideas preceding. Just because something involves emotion doesn't make it utterly devoid of reason. Try some reading again with some study notes.
>>7430018
ok, culmination
the true philosophical exploration it´s in the first part. without that, the third part is a medium-tier sad little story.
>>7429992
>Have Oxford University Press edition
>Got it in 2 for 3 Oxford deal along with Death of Ivan Ilyich/other tolstoy stories and collection of old Celtic tales
>Cover is painting by Ilya Repin
Patrician as fuq
damn son you ain't get it yet
the crystal palace be western culture u feel me?
dat underground nigga just be nihilism u know like russian libtards back in the days and commies and fascists and moosleemz and all dat shit ma
>>7430233
The Crystal Palace is a reference to the novel "What is to be Done?" A character dreams of turning the Crystal Palace (an actual establishment in Saint Petersburg) into a commune.
Kierkegaard = muh god, muh knight of faith hurr durr, I'm a deep and tortured soul except god is a lion roaring inside me!
Dostoyevsky (with the exception of Notes From Underground, which is good) = muh god, muh christianity
Camus = le sisyphus is le happy! just pretend life is good haha!! XD
Sartre (Nausea) = decent premise and idea ruined by painfully bad writing
Nietzsche = edgy philosophical version of YOLO
Why are the existentialists so shit? Two of them are weaklings who hide behind muh sky daddy, one of them literally broke down and said "Just pretend like you're happy lol" and one of them was a sickly resentful manic depressive who wrote odes to Wagner and destruction from his hospital bed.
Schopenhauer / Ligotti / Cioran / Zappfe > the existentialists
>>7430471
Existentialism is a spook. Why can't they just deal with reality?
>>7430471
>Schopenhauer / Ligotti / Cioran / Zappfe > the existentialists
Agreed. I've read all the existentialists you listed as well as Schopenhauer and Cioran. Where do I start with Ligotti and Zappfe?
>>7430500
Individualism is a spook.
>>7430500
Stirner>everyone
>>7430526
Not really. If anything, the "self" is the only thing you can empirically prove.
>>7429602
>reading it in translation
>being this bleb
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEl59biItfY
>>7430518
Ligotti "Conspiracy Against the Human Race"
Zapffe "The Last Messiah"
>>7430608
Thank you
>>7429602
It's actually TBK because this is making fun of what you think it stands for.
>>7430542
So Stirner is basically scientism?
>>7430660
The first ten chapters were woven out of an essay Dostoevsky wrote earlier.
>>7430702
In the respect that science doesn't place value judgements on ethics because that's ideology. Egoism is the natural state of organisms to competitively strive for their own interests.
>>7430717
Isn't that just the fundamental doctrine of liberalism?
>>7430720
Sure, it certainly forms some foundation of classical liberalism. The context of Stirner's work is very important to truly appreciate his perspective. He lived in a time of political unrest, heavily influenced by socialist ideals.
It's great, but there's no resolution. When he actually offers resolution in the Elder Zosima chapters of TBK, its pretty much unsatisfactory.
>>7430779
There's not supposed to be a solution, the guy deliberately fucks up the resolution out of spite (or to prove to himself that he isn't a piano key).
>>7429629
sartre sucks.
>>7430233
Crystal Palace is a shit football team m8.
>>7429738
Who are you and why aren't you the same thing as your ideal? Do you even know what you're doing, lol?
>>7430706
Yeah since he did a ideological 180.
He is making fun of who he was.
