Archived threads in /lit/ - Literature - 492. page
- Home
- Board: /lit/ - Literature
- Reading: Archived threads in /lit/ - Literature - 492. page
Why does /lit/ have such a massive hateboner for this man?
>>8044669
I don't like him because he distracts new generations from real literature. But then again he's getting young people to read, which is good even though his books aren't.
>>8044669
https://youtu.be/JgDwaJ0WCVE?t=87
Absolute madman.
well all i know is what ive heard, that all his major releases have been written by ghostwriters, and that just annoys and pisses me off.
Natalism is the ultimate failing of the categorical imperative
*unbalanced natalism
>>8044424
how come
What is the categorical imperative?
Did Socrates have Oppositional Defiant Disorder and if so, should he still be revered?
>>8044325
Yes. Sooner or later psychology will have a disorder and medication for every personality type.
>>8044328
ODD is a condition in which a child displays an ongoing pattern of uncooperative, defiant, hostile, and annoying behavior toward people in authority. The child's behavior often disrupts the child's normal daily activities, including activities within the family and at school.
This seems more like a disorder than just a personality and it fits our man to the bone
The ideal is not social perfection.
Hello, /lit/ I'm looking for some help with Frege's Sense and Reference.
This bit:
>What is intended to be said by a=b seems to be that the signs or names "a" and "b" designate the same thing, so that those signs themselves would be under discussion; a relation between them would be asserted. But this relation would hold between the names or signs only insofar as they named or designated something. It would be mediated by the connection of each of the two signs with the same designated thing. But this is arbitrary. Nobody can be forbidden to use any arbitrarily producible event or object as a sign for something. In that case the sentence a=b would no longer refer to the subject matter, but only to its mode of designation; we would express no proper knowledge by its means. But in many cases this is just what we want to do. If the sign "a" is distinguished from the sign "b" only as object (here, by means of its shape), not as sign (i.e., not by the manner in which it designates something), the cognitive value of a=a becomes essentially equal to that of a=b, provided a=b is true.
I don’t get it, if ‘a’ is distinguished from ‘b’, looking at them only as objects and not as symbols how will these objects ever be subjected to a relation of equality? I mean, how can one, going by Frege’s definition of equality, ever imply that “a is the same as b” only looking at a and b as objects (physically presumably), given that as objects they are different (in shape).
If objects are themselves different (due to their shape or whatever reason) why would a statement of equality that expresses proper knowledge ever be made, since, by virtue of the fact that they are different, we perceive them as separate? In general won’t a statement of equality that expresses proper knowledge only be made if those two things were "equal" somehow and given that they are not equal as objects then, they would only ever be equal as signs.
For example, consider the letter 'a' written in Times New Roman and 'a' in Arial. We would say a = a in no other context than that both the ‘a's, as signs, refer to the same referent of 'a' the letter in the English language that is used in words. The ‘a’s then are very much symbols.
How can a statement (using Frege’s example now) such as a=b ever have any cognitive value if a and b are not looked at as symbols and are different as objects?
>>8044289
>they would only ever be equal as signs.
Should have added a bit here, it seems that in Frege's case a and b are neither the same objects nor are to be looked at as signs, which is why I don't see how he can say that a=bwould have any:
>cognitive value
Btw I know this is a very small part of the whole shit.
But still, this bit tripped me up and I am curious about what he was trying to say here.
Are there any books that touch on the subject of "celebrity culture" or concept of "idols"? Preferably with a perspective that opposes/condemns it all...
The Mirror Effect
thread synthpop theme
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D3AOoGFkeU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOv2JorfCs8
plus acoustic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFHdcQ-2fv8
>>8044257
>Are there any books that touch on the subject of "celebrity culture" or concept of "idols"? Preferably with a perspective that opposes/condemns it all...
So basically you just want someone to feed you back your opinions? Why waste your time/money? Just sit alone in a corner and think about celebrities you hate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8kFqiv8Vww
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8czs8v6PuI
kinda autistic t b h
Ezra Pound reading Canto I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fUEYs3TsFA
I discovered this video while studying Pound for a course in Modernist Poetry and wanted to hear a reading of the Canto for rhythm and thought "jeez, this faggot is really ruining Pound's poem" until I realized it was him.
>>8044623
just because it's him it doesn't matter that the notion doesn't stand :3
Discussion Time! Lets talk about Stephen Vincent Benet's short story By the Waters of Babylon. Link to full story here if you haven't read it: http://www.tkinter.smig.net/outings/rosemountghosts/babylon.htm
Can we talk about WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON? AHHHH I'M SO CONFUSED
I mean, I thought it'd be nice to read something together like /co/ does but if /lit/ isn't into that kind of thing...
>>8044174
I've just read it. Meh Standard postapocalyptic fare. Not much to talk about, for me.
>>8044283
I'm wondering if it's really about Indians because I kind of got that vibe. Either that or small people/bugs, I don't know it's really confusing.
If this picture was a book, what book would it be?
I'm trying to look for a book about solitude, depression and early adulthood that is set in a relatively modern setting.
I'm not looking for meme young adult books like Maze Runner or Hunger Games, am I asking for too much?
>>8044087
Franny and Zooey by J.D. Salinger.
>>8044087
No Longer Human
Taipei
Anyone read Arabian Nights / One Thousand and One Nights?
Which stories are the best? I've only read Simbad the Sailor so far
>>8044085
I like the one about the street-rat that wins over the princess with genie powers.
>>8044115
Did you actually read it though?
>>8044115
RIFF RAFF
Third rate Murakami.
>>8044072
short story game untouchable
>>8044072
Who?
What other writers have prose on the same level as Joyce and Proust? Preferably modern, but any writers are good.
>>8044050
Woolf
instead of "any writers are good," one should read the post as "it's fine if they are not modern"
Dog
What types of books do (only) English majors read? Not text books, I mean what types of prose and poetry are they assigned to read and analyze that a casual reader might not consider. I was originally going to major in English/literature but switched. I'm still really interested in it as a hobby though.
>>8043997
not an english major but I took a few 200 level literature courses, this is what I read:
canons and canonicity:
-eugene onegin
-hamlet
-merchant of venice
course i do not remember the name of:
borges - labyrinths
grillert - jealousy
marquez - one hundred years of solitude
shalamov - kolyma tales
>>8043997
literary theory.
get the norton anthology.
>>8043997
lots of "classics"
required reading:
Arabian Nights
Beowulf
The Wanderer
Canterbury Tales (Bonus if you do the Decameron)
sonnets from Petrarch, Sir Thomas Wyatt, Philip Sidney, Spenser, Shakespeare, etc
poetry of the Romantics like Keats, Wordsworth, Coleridge, etc
long story short, lit majors learn a lot about the various "segments" and trends that have appeared throughout literary history
What are some cool Greek words?
anime is a mistake
>>8043935
Evangelion
>>8043935
grimbuts
>he talks about My Twisted World as if it is a work of literature
>>8043869
it is technically a work of literature even if it is bereft of artistry
>>8043869
>called a manifesto
>is an autobiography
>>8043869
I like to consider it as if the actions Elliot took afterwards had never occurred. A stand alone piece of fiction, satirizing certain aspects of modern pop culture and the pursuit of pleasure and love. damn it ellie. If you had just written the final act as the killings in third person, pretended it wasn't autobiographical it would have probably done well. your dad would likely made it into a movie too.
Nietzsche's suggestion that aesthetics should be the supreme value above truth, as opposed to truth as the supreme value above aesthetics, is what lead to the catastrophe of modern aesthetics whose quality isn't beholden to truth, there is no such thing as "true beauty" anymore, it's just a matter of who most represents the "spirit of the age" (or the "current year", as it manifests politically).
Nietzsche's idea of truth here is contaminated, and it is the contaminated conception of truth that he rebels against. After truth passed from subject (revelation, truth reveals itself consciously) to object (freethinking, the Enlightenment, truth is an object to denude), materialism rebels against the incoherent, freethinking enterprise, and identifies truth strictly with empiricism: what we see and hear, and ends up raising utility above it (and Nietzsche is actually rebelling against utility as the supreme value more than he is against truth). Nietzsche is working with the materialist conception of truth, and of course realizes that the empirical is altogether a matter of perspective, if what we see and hear is synonymous with truth, then there is no monolithic truth, each person has his own "truth". But in order to accept this conclusion, one must first accept the entire post-freethinking enterprise, the materialist, realist enterprise. Once truth becomes purely relative, then it ceases to have any significance beyond taste, and if truth is merely a matter of taste, then taste itself is the predicate upon which it dependent, and taste itself is aesthetics, so Nietzsche says truth as a product of taste is of no value compared to the taste itself, merely a servant of taste. And once this is accepted, then the taste which is the most exotic will always be most valued, whatever is the "spirit of the age", the "current year", is what is most fresh, and therefore most exciting, and this impulse assumes control over all art and politics. But of course the dialectic is not complete, to be complete in abandonment of God, the vagaries must be abolished, and destruction becomes the measure of all things, because destruction is the ultimate excitement, the ultimate in freshness, as it is always the ultimate rebellion against every creative act prior to itself.
Anyone interested in reading about this in depth, Father Seraphim Rose wrote a work on it (you can skip the preface, which just explains it's a chapter of an uncompleted book): http://oodegr.co/english/filosofia/nihilism_root_modern_age.htm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mw8XE3j_c0U
tl;dr
>>8043614
Just read the first sentence, then
