>>24949492
Contemporary horoscopes/astrology is targeted to retarded women with pig shit for brains.

>>24947777
Checked

>>24949772
Once I start a book a feel an obligation to finish it, mama didn't raised no pussy

File: kojak.png (641 KB, 745x637)

641 KB PNG

I don't read jews, baby.

>>24949492
Because the prime mover of astrology(sun vs earth vs moon) has been completely replaced by weather science. And then weather science got replaced by topological mapping of satellite data.

>>24950619
The entire point is that we HAVE alternative systems better than the current one, but they're in the past. The two best systems of government are medieval monarchy and aristocratic republic. Evidence across hundreds of years bears out the virtues of these two systems, to the detriment of others. Lewis >>24943914 is right, we need to go back. The best ideas lie in the past, waiting for us to rediscover them.

>>24932740
>nietzsche scholar
>fighting the good fight.

huh???

>>24936191
Being NATO bitch helps Europeans to focus on maximizing their dopamine receptor activity while they give USA the reigns on military strength. Simple as. Enjoyment over hard work. I'm not saying it's smart but it is what it is.

Bap looks like that? He's cute.

>>24950837
yes he's young cute and jacked. his exterior beauty reflects the profundity of his ideas

>>24950735
>it is the most Vitalistic and captures the youth
It's the most corrosive, because it aims at the youth while representing and celebrating the worst traits of youth: irresponsibility, uneducatedness, frivolity, naivety, promiscuity, shortsighted thinking, inexpirience, inconsidered use of drugs and so on. If the children of a society accept this culture as their own, the downfall begins. I think that the breaking point was Elvis Presley and the fact that the adult people who despised Elvis were too powerless against the young and stupid masses who loved him so maniacally. Elvis and his enablers and lovers started the mass cultural destruction of the west. Elvis was the original wigger.
>>24950751
based

>>24950751
Do people actually believe this?

>>24950735
Does anybody actually find stuttering electronoise more vitalistic than let’s say, heavy metal?

>>24950838
Most would simply consider the latter lame and gay

>>24950836
Only the truly enlightened. This belief is not found in the mind of the average joe.

I found the first 3 books alot of fun and 4 kinda killed it for me. What order did they come out in its not right in the op

Completely out of order. The first few DOAWK books were fine, but even 12 year old me noticed a pretty drastic drop in quality after the fifth one

Reported

File: IMG_8105.png (2 KB, 1200x1200)

2 KB PNG

>>24949304
love these books as a kid but teachers are faggots that didn't let us read them because they want reading to be miserable

>>24949304
I recall maybe up until Cabin Fever, then grew out of them. Maybe Dog Days, but that may be me confusing with the movie. It was fine. Suprised its still going desu.

>>24949118
From the introduction
>Rape fits well into Ovid’s overall focus on power, victimization, and trauma. The specific language that Ovid employs to designate rape is consistent with Roman legal terms denoting forced sexual penetration. The key word is again vis, “violent force,” which is perhaps the closest Latin can come to a one-word correspondence to the English “rape,” though the meanings do not overlap entirely—vis could cover various acts of public and private violence, such as armed assault or rebellion. Sexual vis was most definitely a crime, and the rapes the epic presents would certainly not have been considered normal or acceptable acts—they would have been as horrific to the Roman mind as they are to ours, especially since they are regularly perpetrated against young virgins who would otherwise have been able to marry and bear legitimate children.

And if not virgins, generally against married women. So it would without any ambiguity be considered a crime by Romans. Ovid doesn't describe things we would consider rape but the Romans probably wouldn't, such as martial rape or or raping a slave or raping a woman who has slept with men out of wedlock or raping a woman during wartime.

>>24949141
>Visual beauty is indeed a constant source of danger for those who possess it, whether male or female, and often prefigures transformation. The word Ovid most consistently uses to designate “beauty” is forma, the same word he uses in the epic’s opening lines to state his theme: “shapes (formae) transformed / into new bodies.” What makes a man lovely in the epic is precisely what makes a woman so: softness, smoothness, youth, a pale but also rosy complexion—and virginity.

A lot of translators simply convey aestheticization of violence, but Ovid intentionally and continually links aesthetics with violence as distinct themes; beauty prefigures violence for Ovid, since unlike conventional Roman values which can sometimes identify them, Ovid sees violence as the force which destroys beauty. But McCarter is careful not to presume how Ovid feels or thinks about what he's writing about and leaving the reader to interpret the ambiguity

>Whether we see Ovid’s own poem as art that challenges power or reasserts it depends, in many ways, on how we ourselves feel about power and art and how we choose to read his tales. It is not always clear whose side Ovid himself is on—that of the abusers or that of the abused. At times, he seems sympathetic to those who are transformed; at times, he seems positively gleeful to describe their victimization in excruciating detail. At one moment, he seems deferential to power; at another, deeply irreverent.

>>24948975
That's fair, although as I pointed out, sometimes McCarter has the opposite problem, cutting stuff out and compressing too much. In some places I do prefer McCarter's renderings, but in others I prefer Melville's. I was 50/50 on which I'd buy a physical copy of, Melville's having the original line numeration at the top of the page swung it for me, it means I'm not scrabbling around when trying to find a citation. The further you get in a book in McCarter's version, the further it gets from the original numeration, there's no reason she couldn't indicate it also, like in Poochigian's Argonautica translation, which is also iambic pentameter.

>>24949032
The Latin 'rapio' could mean sexual rape, but also meant snatching, abducting, grabbing, with an undertone of forcefulness or violence. It didn't necessarily always mean rape in the modern English sense, but where Ovid uses it, it often has that implication. And McCarter is well aware of that, she doesn't over-use the term.

But I did notice in her introduction that she doesn't understand pre-contemporary English idiom, she criticises an older translation for mentioning a female character's 'bosom' and lambasts it for inserting erotic imagery where it isn't in the Latin, but of course 'bosom' simply means 'chest' and only originally meant tits as a euphemism. Like in the King James Bible, you read of 'the bosom of Abraham', clearly it doesn't mean his boobies. And if I remember rightly, the Latin at that point does use a (non-sexual) term for chest.

Helpful discussion, thanks

Ovid as a modern soi

>>>/co/

>>24950543
Which KJV is supposed to be the perfect one, the original 1611 or the one people actually read today, since there were multiple revisions and they aren’t identical? If it’s the 1611, why doesn’t anyone use it? If it’s a later one, who changed God’s perfect word and when did it become perfect? Before 1611, did Christians just not have a real Bible at all? When the KJV translators openly said they weren’t inspired and that they were revising earlier English Bibles, were they wrong or just being dishonest? If the KJV can override or “fix” the Greek and Hebrew, what’s the point of Greek and Hebrew in the first place? Which Textus Receptus is the inspired one, since there are multiple editions that don’t agree with each other? And if God only preserved His word in English, why did nobody seem to know that for the first 1,600 years of church history?

>>24946147
Some of its advices are bad, some are neutral, some are good. However, its previousd version, then Adam had two wives Lilith and Eve, I like it much better. And it is a pity that Methuselah's 965-year-long life is not described in sufficient detail in the Bible, Methuselah, my bow to him, was much wiser than Jesus Christ, who lasted only 33 years on Earth.

>>24950557
>Which KJV is supposed to be the perfect one, the original 1611 or the one people actually read today, since there were multiple revisions and they aren’t identical?
The word of God on earth follows the trajectory of the Word of God on earth. Were there changes to Jesus’ body as he grew? Did he not also grow in wisdom and stature? Luke 2:40 and Luke 2:52. Which Jesus was perfect? The one before he increased in wisdom or the one after? I’m aware that there are minor spelling differences in the different King James versions.

>If it’s the 1611, why doesn’t anyone use it? If it’s a later one, who changed God’s perfect word and when did it become perfect?
God changed God’s perfect word. The Holy Spirit, quoting Old Testament scripture, makes changes as he see fit. He can do that because it’s his word. Compare 1 Corinthians 14:21 and Isaiah 28:11. It’s not the exact same, because that scripture is used at a different time for a different audience, speaking a different language.

>Before 1611, did Christians just not have a real Bible at all?
What do you mean “real”?

>>24950581
>When the KJV translators openly said they weren’t inspired and that they were revising earlier English Bibles, were they wrong or just being dishonest?
I have read the preface. They were wrong, not dishonest. The Assyrian, the rod of God’s anger in Isaiah 10:5-7, did not know that he was being used by God. Same goes for the KJB translators.

>If the KJV can override or “fix” the Greek and Hebrew, what’s the point of Greek and Hebrew in the first place?
Biblically, a translation is always to a better stage/condition/version (see 2 Sam. 3:10, Col. 1:13, Heb. 11:5). The Hebrew and Greek served their purpose at crucial moments in history (and still serve their purpose today, don’t get me wrong). Today English is the lingua franca and the expansion of English in history coincides quite nicely with the King James.

>Which Textus Receptus is the inspired one, since there are multiple editions that don’t agree with each other?
I didn’t claim that any Textus Receptus is inspired. I’m claiming the King James Bible is. God can use any foundation; he used sinful men to speak and pen down his word. He spoke his word through a false prophet like Balaam.

>And if God only preserved His word in English, why did nobody seem to know that for the first 1,600 years of church history?
Today, God’s word is preserved in English. That wasn’t always the case in history, simply because English didn’t appear on the scene until a long time after. The word of God was preserved in Hebrew and Aramaic among the Jews, then later in Greek among the New Testament churches. But even in Paul’s time, people had started messing with the word, see 2 Corinthians 2:17 (“we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God”). God does not limit himself to church history, he has his own schedule, so when “the fulness of the time was come” (Galatians 4:4) his perfect word appeared.

>>24950056
>We have the originals in the received text
And what is 'the received text', pray tell? It's just a collective term for printed editions of the Greek in the 16th and 17th centuries based on whatever manuscripts the editors had available to them, all were from the middle ages as far as I know. And those editions different from each other as well, so there is no precise definition of what's the 'received text' anyway. There is nothing special or magical about it, especially when we have much older manuscripts.

>>24942860
I second some other anons on here: It reads like an incoherent rant at times. But he clearly lays out his views and beliefs in it.

>>24942860
He didn't wrote it

>>24950051
So they could give Poland to Russia, of course.

>>24950074
>he clearly lays out his views and beliefs
No he doesn't. Not clearly at lest. For instance he states that the theoretical basis for national socialism is the racist theory of history to oppose the Marxist materialistic theory of history. Yet nowhere he goes into depth or even superficially explains what that theory entails. It's just mostly vibes and defines itself in opposition to marxists
The only lucid and coherent part I found was the international politics one, which is written so differently from the rest of the book you'd be lead to think someone else penned it

One of my high school teachers once told me this book was poorly written garbage. She was a jewess, couldn’t read german, at one point required the whole class to visit a holocaust museum, and yes every major city in america has such a museum. Thanks for reading my blog.

>>24950057
Lmao do librarians go from page to book to librarian

>>24950059
Library PTSD

>>24950059
im kinda into the glorified social worker aspect desu its one of the appeals.

>>24949864
My sister is one.

My mom ks one. She got in with a bachelor's degree in equine science. Without an MA you can only be a librarian for small-town libraries though

>>24949373
I read 2 books this year and I am impressed, feels pretty good

>>24949427
You got this my brotha. I believe in thee.

>>24949373
it's ok anon
it's not a job, you are not supposed to make up lists and schedules and force yourself to do someting
you should only read whatever you like at the moment when you feel like reading something
I think reading more than 5 books puts you easily in the top half of the readers in your country

>force yourself to read stuff you don't enjoy / don't understand
Pseuds gonna pseud

I'm ten books short on my twenty-four-book goal myself right now. Was thirteen short a week ago. Can't fail, mommy would see that. I can't disappoint mommy

>>24950395
>>24950490
>>24950496
Newfags should lurk instead of posting off-topic garbage. Don't forget >>24948881 either.

>>24950505
It's very slow, the protag is an insufferable bitch, and the ending is bad.

>>24950505
It's old and extremely slow by modern fantasy standards. The books are long, the characters spend a lot of time wandering through his expansive, detailed setting. The payoff for this slow build up feels extremely cathartic when it happens, but it requires patience to get to.

>>24950505
It was pretty popular back in the 1990s when I first picked it up. But the fantasy seen was so different back then it's hard to make a comparison.

>>24950170
Do you like any modern fantasy or it is all D&D now/MMO lore now?

>>24950487
>There's nothing that doesn't exist
Retarded frogposter.

>>24950500
he is correct.

>>24950500
Either a thing exists or its nonexistence is a linguistic quirk. Either way, Wittgenstein is right. PS: /lit/erature?

File: apuwizard.jpg (23 KB, 200x200)

23 KB JPG

>>24950487
Have you just read the existentialist frogman, by chance?
“Nonexistence” as a concept is meaningful and necessary for describing the world (absences, negatives, fictional discourse, etc.), but it does not denote an entity in reality. That doesn’t make it nonsense — it makes it a useful conceptual tool for expressing truth.

>>24950493
>direct biblical analysis is more of a protestant thing, down the hall to the left.
Yeah, catholics and orthodox christians hate reading their book. They let their priests decide what parts they should know.
>Scott Hahn who is a calvanist to catholic convert does more directly related scripture analysis (and John Bergsma), you would probably like them
Doubtful, but thanks for the suggestions none the less. I much prefer the academic approach.
>Certainly you can realize that this 12 minute sermon which [...] is indictative of a much deeper and rich spiritual life that one can engage in, which I am referring to.
Certainly you can realize that me typing to the character limit, half discussing the parts of the old testament that the preacher referenced, slightly less than half directly talking about what the preacher was preaching about(compunction and how to use it to stop making mistakes), and a little bit talking about my reaction to what I was watching. That this was engaging with what he pulled references from, and their use or misuse in his sermon. That this was talking directly about what he was trying to teach you, by summarizing what he said, in my own words. Surely you can realize that this "much deeper and rich spiritual life that one can engage in", is just the standard human experience that literally every culture engages in. Certainly you would have seen that I was engaged with the topic, and was able to understand what was being said.
>[...] has no relation to the problem of evil or some surface level argue about the nature of God [...]
He wouldn't have been able to resolve any of the various problems of evil/suffering in 12 minutes, as it's the #1 deconversion reason for people leaving christianity. Certainly he wouldn't have actually been able to argue about any level of god's nature(surface or not), in 12 minutes. Aquinas likely made the best attempt at discussing the nature of your god(and it took him around 300 pages to discuss everything he felt he needed to in Summa contra Gentiles Book 1), through the negation process, of listing all the things that your god isn't. I'm not aware of anyone doing a better job than Aquinas in the ~1000 years before him or the ~800 years after him. So there's no possible way that a preacher would outdo one of the best writers that christianity ever had.

Certainly you can admit that I was able to achieve whatever expectations you had from me watching that sermon. I would say overachieve, but I'll be fine with you admitting that I, at the very least, managed to achieve them. Showing that atheists do understand, even without having the Holy Spirit to guide in all truths.

>>24945026
Jesus The Son of Man by Gibran (along with his other works besides The Prophet) imo ought to get more attention than it does.
>Once every hundred years Jesus of Nazareth meets Jesus of the Christian in a garden among the hills of Lebanon. And they talk long; and each time Jesus of Nazareth goes away saying to Jesus of the Christian, "My friend, I fear we shall never, never agree".
(from Sand and Foam)

File: gospel-of-john.jpg (68 KB, 620x874)

68 KB JPG

>>24945026

>>24946388
kieth

>>24947433
Are these schizos in the room with us right now?

>>24935478
I'm one of twenty people living in this hellscape province but good luck finding where

>>24931414
>22
>Saskatchewan, Canada
>The Mayor of Casterbridge

>27
>Iran
>Experiencing Fiction by James Phelan

>>24931414
21
Israel
Just finished Watership Down

28
Denmark
Cyclonopedia

>>24931414
>29
>USA
>Complete Works of Plato, St. Augustine's Confessions, Calvin's Institutes, Moby Dick, Madame Bovary, Paradise Lost, Pensees, Britain in Revolution, Shield of Achilles

>>24948862
>real philosophy
No such thing.

>>24950501
No one is praising the author, only the ideas presented are being referred to, who cares if the author isn't original

>>24948191
Eternal Recurrence and the Overman. The sorcerer must be exalted above the priest. Speed and not sacrifice. Applied Spinozism, k-goth technics.

File: images - 2025-12-12T023223.905.jpg (42 KB, 359x557)

42 KB JPG

Holy Orthodoxy

>>24950832
That is Christianity???