So let's talk about this lie. The lie of omission perpetuated by all advanced high school english and freshman comp classes alike.
>Oh look, Hamlet just happened to find Yorick's corpse and get moody!
No you fucking fucks. As the court jester Yorick was a member of the royal court, specifically a member of the royal court whose job it was to speak the truth even if it was guised in humor. The significance of this entire scene is that Yorick was found just outside of the castle in a shallow grave years after his mysterious disappearance without explanation. The obvious implication is that "someone" had him murdered, particularly someone within the castle who felt that they could freely murder a member of the King's court back when Hamlet was a child. If we're narrowing it down, it was probably Claudius, the same guy who murdered the King back then.
Hamlet didn't have to hear from a ghost to know that something was foul in Denmark, he probably knew it quite well when a man who used to make him laugh and give him rides on his back was murdered for making a crack about the King's brother trying to sneak into the King's wife's bed shortly before the King's murder.
TO BENIS OR NOT TO BENIS
>>7448934
/thread
>>7448934
10/10
I blew it tonight, you guys. I really blew it. If you don't know me, I've been reading the classic novels. I figured it's good to experience the great works of art that have been made before I was born and also, and this is the main reason, I want to be able to recommend books to the girl I love. She enjoys reading. I took some time off from reading for a while after I finished The Stranger. I'm now halfway through Lord of the Flies. I'm not enjoying it as much as the other books I've read so far, it's a little heavy on adjectives for my taste, but it's definitely good enough for me to finish it.
I've been making these threads and people always make fun of me. I understand why. I'm pretty awkward, but I still think I have a chance with her. Well, tonight I screwed up. I botched a conversation worse than I ever have before. I started a conversation with her, that's progress for me. I just thought I'd say a few words to her, then leave. I was feeling confident because I was previously able to bring up my new reading hobby and mention a few books I've read. So I come up to her, say a few things and start to walk away, and then she says something that I didn't hear. I stutter like an idiot for a while pretending I did hear whatever she said. I don't know why I do that. You know how sometimes that works? You don't hear what somebody says but you say "yeah" anyway. Well here it didn't work. She just said "huh", and then I said the stupidest, most autistic thing I've ever said in my life: "I didn't hear what you said. I was just trying to end the conversation." I don't know why I said that, it just came out. I want to kill myself.
Anyway, I saw Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind for the first time today. I was really great. It made me think of her, anything romantic does. She inspires me to be a better person, she really does. Anyway, in that movie they mention Alexander Pope. I'm interested in him now. Where do I start with him?
Thank you for reading. I needed to tell this story. I keep replaying it in my head. All I had to do was say "What?".
>>7448411
1. you don't love her
2. you're reading some lesser classics. If you haven't read at least King Lear and Hamlet, please do that
3. if she knows you at all she knows you're awkward because obviously you're socially awkward
write about in a fictional format
oh and Pope fucking blows. Just read some Percy Bryce Shelley or Robert Browning
Yeah, you know...just uh, avoid anything H.I.V. related, support transgendered people and faggots, and kill niggers, and it'll all be good.
>>7448411
Stop trying to impress girls and stop trying to improve yourself for a girl.
>go to kikebook
>pick your most literate friend
>click the "about" tab on their profile, scroll down until you see books
>post their pleb taste
>>7448290
>having a facebook
>pretending you're better than any of the other sheeple
I think the real pleb here is YOU op
>>7448295
this desu
>>7448295
this
Hey there pleb. Yeah, you. What books are you reading? They better be patrician.
>>7447824
Bloom looks so much like Sartre here.
>>7447824
Ultrapatrician, transcendent even: The Recognitions and The Lime Twig.
why is steve buscemi asking me what i'm reading? (borges)
Do you guys think that Barnes and Noble exclusives are worth it?
I've been buying a shit ton recently just because how fucking majestic they look compared to the cheaper alternatives.The only problem is that they burn a huge hole in my pocket since they're ridiculously expensive.
Pic related- it's the one I'm thinking of buying next
You buy moist turds in book form
>>7447686
>they look good
>>7447686
Do you find them aesthetically pleasing?
Do you think you have enough money to buy a lot of them so they match on a shelf?
Do you think Barnes and Noble is going to still be selling books in the next decade?
![51zP2kOP+CL._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/RBKsvxU.jpg "51zP2kOP+CL. SY344 BO1,204,203,200 [1]")
ITT: We post literally perfect books.
This thread is off to a great start. :s
ITT: We rate each other's pen names. I'll start.
C.C. Turnip
OG Mudbone
>>7446472
Lord Parfington of Wilburshirestonville
Gregory Berrycone
I've just picked up a copy of The Ego and His Own by Max Stirner.
Before I embark upon reading it I thought I would try and generate a general Stirner discussion here on /lit/ in order to help motivate and equip me with the necessary tools/mindset requisite for a full understanding and appreciation of this most sensational of meme philosophers.
Some questions:
- To what extent is Stirner just a limper, shallower Nietzsche?
- Why is Stirner so non-canon?
- How did Stirner come to inhabit the same meme-sphere as Thomas Pynchon and DFW on /lit/?
Bump?
no
because marx raped him as far as i know but idk bout that. have´nt read st.max yet.
plus he´s edgy but fun. In the first half of the book he shittalks Feuerbach to an amusing extend.
post some stirners
>>7446207
Stirner is so non canon because he asks the obvious fucking questions that any 10 year old could figure out. The same questions that the entire non philosophy reading public knows. But rather than ignore these questions and proceed in to a 500 book length Hegel-like diatribe to try and get his place in the canon and lecturing post, he just points out the bullshit instead.
Just finished pic related, what are /lits/ thoughts on this book.
Also what's the best hemingway
>>7445053
hemmingway*
That cover is so fucking lame.
I wish it was a universal rule that OP MUST kick off the discussion himself rather than just lazily going: Thing. Thoughts?
>>7445053
What are YOUR thoughts? You just finished it, the majority of us haven't read it or haven't read it in a while. Don't be a bundle of stick.
The Sun Also Rises is his best work. The next "big" novels of his are (in order) The Old Man and the Sea, For Whom the Bell Tolls, and A Farewell to Arms.
>>7445072
The first edition Scribner's is nice, so is the later edition (pic related).
Let's discuss The Republic of Plato, since it is considered one of the finest works of philosophical /lit/erature.
Is Polemarchus the worst debater in world history? He enters the conversation in Book I with a strong and plausible definition of justice, and allows himself to be converted within minutes by Socrates' utter nonsense.
How easy would it have been for him to put up an argument?
>No Socrates, being good at guarding something has nothing to do with your ability to steal. We have already distinguished doctors, lyre players, bricklayers, and others. I see no reason not to distinguish between thiefs and guards - and a quote from Homer about a single mythical figure won't convince me by the way.
>The grouping of friend and enemy is based on existential commitments, not any objective valuation of goodness or badness.
>No Socrates, I believe the harsh treatment of moral agents who are capable of reflection may have beneficial consequences, unlike the harsh treatment of horses, because these two objects of harsh treatment are qualitiatively different.
Similarly, how do we feel about Thrasymachus? I believe his attitude to Socrates' childish stratagems and intellectual cowardice is justified, and I think he makes a good if inarticulate sociological case for ethical nihilism with normative legalism which Socrates fails to refute with petty references to rare cases of fallibility in matters of self-interest, meaningless distinctions between practical arts and the art of earning a living, and simply incorrect statements about the lack of ambition showed by doctors and musciains to excel against fellow practitioners.
Thrasymachus' arguments about justice being "the rule of the stronger" are powerfully refuted by Socrates. You can call them 'rare,' but instances of fallibility which Socrates raises do indicate that it exists, that there are flaws in Thrasymachus' arguments. It's not enough for Socrates that the argument in favor of justice be MOSTLY true. If there are any exceptions, circumstance and cleverness can enlarge them. Socrates wants an airtight definition of what justice is, something that can stand against any test.
Incidentally, it's pretty easy to draw a line between Thrasymachus and Nietzsche. I think half the reason Nietzsche got so annoyed at Plato is that Plato anticipated his argument and blew it the fuck out more than two thousand years before he was born.
socrates' definition of justice is more less mathematical/logical and irrefutable
if you want to talk about how real life works, that's a different story
>Let's
>Let
> 's
>Let us
>Lettuce
Alright everybody, I have finally created a comprehensive list of every Philosophical work you should ever read, so we no longer need a retarded guide.
What do you think?
>>7444393
>All that Hegel
No thanks
Also fuck off with the greeks
>>7444415
Hegel is important you retard
And really theres barely any Greek on there
>>7444393
Nice, this strikes the core of western philosophy, very good.
1/3
2/3
3/3
4/3
Are you really going to let this drug-addled loser be the voice of your generation, /lit/? Get cracking and write that novel, for all our sakes.
Can't I just kill him?
>>7443161
I am but it's in Arabic so it probably won't be a generational voice unless we take over your countries within 10-20 years. :s
On it:^)
Sound off, faggots. Pic related.
>>7442622
Is the Hughes translation lively?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RfQjFkGsEE
hasn't burned down yet, but it's breddy gud
"Chomsky is empirically wrong." Slavoj Zizek, known Lacanian
>>7441841
Good post OP.
I know shit about linguistics.
Is that paper refuting Chomsky's theories?
>>7441841
>CHOMSHKEE EESH EEMPEERECALLEE WWRONG
