Archived threads in /lit/ - Literature - 199. page
- Home
- Board: /lit/ - Literature
- Reading: Archived threads in /lit/ - Literature - 199. page
Does it go anywhere? Its very well written and not that big of a chore to read but aside from killing people and detailing outfits does it that amazing of a book by the end?
It's nothing short of a masterpiece.
>>8206670
Why don't you finish it and make up your mind yourself?
Or don't.
BEE's characters never grow and his books are essentially plotless. They're decent but it's the literary equivalent to staring at a train crash.
Anyone have opinions on this book? Looking to get a basic familiarity with the field before I dig deeper into individual philosophers and wondering if this is a decent place to start cause I'm not gonna read Copleston
Here's the table of contents:
1. Plato and Socrates: The Fire and the Sun
2. Aristotle: The Spirit of Rational Enquiry
3. Epicurus and Zeno: How to Lead a Good Life
4. St Thomas Aquinas: The Unified Interpretation of Reality
5. René Descartes: Systematic Doubt as Philosophical Method
6. John Locke and Montesquieu: The Liberal State
7. Benedict de Spinoza: Rigorous Thought and Severe Conclusions
8. David Hume: Empirical Verification
9. Immanuel Kant: The Critique of Reason
10. Karl Marx: The March of History
11. Friedrich Nietzsche: The Will to Power
12. Ludwig Wittgenstein: Language and Reality
13. Martin Heidegger: We Have Forgotten Being
14. Jean-Paul Sartre: Existentialist Anguish
15. Jacques Derrida: Deconstructing Reality
I have decent familiarity with chapters 1-5 but only very basic knowledge of the rest.
>>8206631
>not gonna read Copleston
just leave then
>>8206631
This book looks like ass. Just Patrician up and read Copleston, bitch.
i heard this was pretty good also copleston
I'm looking for a book that's filled with mental breaking torment and humiliation which is not a porno book. I am looking for a book that has an actual story, preferably one that involves piss and scat.
100 Days of Reddit
>>8206627
Is reddit really more badass than this shitty board? Seriously, this board is infested with pseudo moralist christ fag repugnicans. I seriously hate this board, but I always hated the layout of reddit and it's upvote system.
>>8206637
underaged are not allowed to browse this board
wardine be cry.
do you think he knew when he wrote the line that that's what he would be remembered for?
why is it so amazing? has anyone ever written something more memorable since 1996?
>>8206612
if by "what he's remembered for" you mean "what a handful of reddit2/lit/ immigrants remember him for"
>>8206612
I think he probably thought "I say things like take me to the library, and step on it!" would've been better received, because people who read tend to like books and libraries.
>>8206612
I know you're saying he's overrated because that line is in IJ, but you're also kind of taking it out of context.
How important is a good opener? Or is the prose style / progression / plot more your thing?
I'm having some trouble, as i always have, with opening my newest short; I know what I want to say but struggle for about a week to find a good way of saying it.
What are your favs? Post examples?
>A screaming comes across the sky. It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
>Hanno the Navigator,the Carthaginian explorer of the fifth century BC, also known as King Hanno II, is distinguished by having a crater on the moon named after him.
>The sun shone, having no alternative, on the nothing new.
>Stately, plump Buck Mulligan came from the stairhead, bearing a bowl of lather on which a mirror and a razor lay crossed.
I hate doing openers, because I can't find a good one. Either the first sentence is something said by a character, or it is something boring as fuck like "It rained on...".
>>8206648
This is my problem, man.
Or it starts with something like "though"
>>8206648
>either someone says something or something is described
Aren't those literally the only two options?
You guys are making a fuss over nothing. Make sure the first paragraph is good as a whole and you're fine.
I've bought about five of these Very Short Introduction books and so far they've all been duds. None of them seemed very "introductory" at all. I'm either retarded, or these books were just an easy way for Oxford Press to make money. I don't want to stay a plebe forever. What are some good intro level books- to any subject?
Those are the like 50 page piece of crap they sell at the counter at waterstones, right? Yeah, avoid those.
There are plenty of guides to the best introductory texts for a given subject. Just ask /lit/ or /his/ or /sci/ or whichever board is most appropriate, or check their stickies.
Also
>A """""short introduction"""""
>Literally everything an expert on the topic knows about the topic
I always found this suspicious. Not for this series I mean, just this genre of book.
>>8206516
Introduction to Intro is a good starting point.
>>8206516
I read this edition of Kant by Roger Scruton. Somehow more difficult in parts than Kant himself.
Okay, /lit/, red pill me on this bitch.
Is her "from NEET rags to riches" story complete bullshit? I mean, I was inspired by her story so I decided to become a NEET and go on welfare so I could become a famous filmmaker - but it's not going so well ATM desu.
>you will never stick your wand between those tits
As far as I know, her rags to riches story isn't bullshit, but you know how the world is: for the one that succeeds, they never tell you of the thousand that starved to death.
She was on welfare and wrote shit books. I wish she had not gotten welfare and instead starved to death.
>>8206328
>red pill me
You're going to fail and die a horrible death.
What's his problem?
diabeetus
Autism
He let fame get to his head.
Whats lit's opinion of this fucker?
Only read a few essays but so far im impressed. I've been feeling that the right had disintegrated intellectually, and its nice to see I was wrong.
bro just read some Nick Land or Alain de Benoist we're off that neoliberal shit now
>>8206235
This place has a shit-ton of marxists and commies.
Don't expect to make it out of here alive.
>>8206286
There's a lot of our kind here, too. Wish we'd talk less about Evola and mention Carlyle more often, though.
I also wish the commies would engage more in debate instead of doing the lazy >>>/pol/
Medieval literature. Is it legit? Or just unga bunga apes smearing ink across a page?
>>8206210
you're clearly too stupid to be here. which is astounding, bc we're all morons.
heave you guys heard uk left euro?
Nice picturesque imagery with high degree of symbolism and allegory
Both very pleasant to read while allowing a very high spiritual / intellectual reading
It is surely underrated
have you read The Tunnel yet?
William H. Gass is widely considered America's foremost prose stylist because of this novel, and it's considered to be near the peak of postmodern literature.
>>8206077
>book named The Tunnel
>Gass
>not Ernesto Sabato
>>8206077
I'm halfway through, it's absolutely incredible. His prose is just heart stoppingly beautiful. Already one of my favourite books, don't listen to tamponposters /lit/
>Nietzsche’s rebellion against altruism consisted of replacing the sacrifice of oneself to others by the sacrifice of others to oneself. He proclaimed that the ideal man is moved, not by reason, but by his “blood,” by his innate instincts, feelings and will to power—that he is predestined by birth to rule others and sacrifice them to himself, while they are predestined by birth to be his victims and slaves—that reason, logic, principles are futile and debilitating, that morality is useless, that the “superman” is “beyond good and evil,” that he is a “beast of prey” whose ultimate standard is nothing but his own whim. Thus Nietzsche’s rejection of the Witch Doctor consisted of elevating Attila into a moral ideal—which meant: a double surrender of morality to the Witch Doctor.
was she right?
If she had a brain, you'd know he never truly vouches for noble values; just lays out his ideas and idolizes them because they're hard af. Ayn Rand is a fucking idiot that is never relevant
Yes, but nobody will admit it.
That didn't make Nietzsche wrong though. It's actually a flaw in trans work that morality hangs off the ego like a still born Siamese twin fetus.
She's now stirner light than she is Nietzsches light.
Yeah but none of that contains an argument why Nietzsche is wrong.
Ayn Rand's promotion of muh morality and muh reason basically amounts to "i-i-if we don't we would be like animals, and that's, like, bad and stuff"
There is nothing irrational about being Attila, really.
You're about to go on the adventure of a lifetime. Pick three books to soothe your soul after a long day's traveling.
Hard Mode:You can't choose any books that someone else has already taken.
>Dante's Inferno
>Walden Pond
>Pilgrim's Progress
>Stoner for the beautiful existential sadness
>Moby-Dick for more existential pondering but also solid keks
>A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man for sheer comfiness
>>8205889
>has a picture with windmills
>declines to take Don Quixote
pleb.
Don Quixote
Petersburg
Pocket Edition of Le Complete Shakespeare
>Les Trois Mousquetaires
>Le Comte de Monte-Cristo
>La Reine Margot
Nothing like Dumas for an adventure.
What is your opinion on the ego? Is it better to attempt to build the ego, nurturing and strengthening it in order to develop an unbreakable singular ego a la Nietzsche, Stirner, etc. or is it better to try to dissolve and destroy the ego a la taoism and buddhism? Should you seek to go against the current of life to impose your own will on it, fighting against anything that gets in the way of manifesting your will, or should you try to go with the current of life, attempting to remove all desires and will?
There's a reason why the mind can go both ways. If you can do both you're gold.
/Eastern Philosophy
that question is being asked by the ego. so, any choice you make will be the 1st one anyway.
if you are to go for the second you dont 'destroy' it or do anything. you just stop and let things go by. but of course when this happens, our consciousness keeps working and showing us all we take to be things ego permanence etc. that is the nature of the human mind. the point is realizing that this things we see are just another natural phenomena, like the sun rising and setting, or the plants withering and thriving.
the language, or at least ours, plays us a trick here, it is always a step ahead. cause by phrasing the issue as 'attempting', 'stopping' etc we are implicitly posing an active agent, no matter what the verb is. and even if we use the passive form this is still being taken as given. if one overlooks this, roaming in the world of ideas using this structure wont take you anywhere.
>>8205699
>s it better to attempt to build the ego,
only hedonists think this
Im going to start reading Fyodor's books and I was wondering if there's any problem if I start by his most critically acclaimed work "The Brothers Karamazov". Speaking in a sense that I'd like to know if there's any book that I should start by or it doesn't matter at all.
>>8205691
it doesn't matter that much if you are already accostumed reading long books.
In my opinion BK it's his best work
>>8205692
thanks m8
Notes from Underground or Crime and Punishment are the general starting points, but it doesn't really matter.
The Brothers K is special in that the religious themes are the most pronounced in it by far.
