Why is it that all great minds of antiquity thought that love was more than a crude neurochemical reaction? Would they have been redpilled if they were alive after the 20th century when advancement in chemistry demonstrated that love/eros is basically just a powerful drug? Honestly explains many things about the current perception of love in relation to modernity.
Many thinkers today are not purely reductive materialists, and theories of the nature of love outside of its biological impetus are still open to discussion. So, to answer your question, you would have to see how the minds of antiquity synthesized the latest scientific/biological/psychological information of their time with their belief system - and make assumptions from there. The first hand experience of any intense emotion feels like its source could be transcendent or exterior - which is why the narrative that love is more than just chemicals still survives. The thing that incels and other data and stats worshippers fail to analyze is the psychology of people who do experience love despite it being inconvenient or not biologically advantageous. These are seen as rare exceptions, lies, malfunctions, or unreliable anecdotes. I don't think it's wise to disregard anecdotes, or assume that these things are merely anomalies. Some people are capable of directing their desires - and many thinkers of antiquity would think that the transcendental nature of love can be witnessed when one sublimates their base desires, or transmutes that energy. In material terms, this would be having the capacity to leverage what you know occurs chemically to serve your will. This is why I would imagine that clever people who remain in stable, long term relationships, commit to simulating an environment where novelty, dopamine, attachment, oxytocin, are constantly flowing. Further, what often fails to be discussed is the will of desire itself, and what shapes it. The current cultural climate does not reward patience, repairs, codependence - it rewards cheap and fast pleasure. So ultimately, any thinker that projects the weakness of his will onto humanity, who is deterministic, or who does not believe that energy can be transmuted, would likely be redpilled. The rest could still find non material explanations for the existence of love.
>>24945804Simply, because they were wise enough to control women and so the only obstacle in their way was women's own innately treacherous, mendacious nature. That's why all the angsty love poems of antiquity only concern fickleness and/or infidelity, because those were the only things that could fuck up love between a man and his prize slave.
>>24945804We only think love is a neurochemical bit of intoxication because we have millennial and zoomette women to deal with on the day to day. Sure, we can lust over them, or we can get a little fuzzy feeling here or there. But we just assume that this is all it is.Only religious people at this point know love is the abiding thing in life and is the fabric of everything. Agape is fundamental and is all-in-all -- "Deus Caritas Est." St. John really understood this and implied it. Credit to Jordan Peterson, he almost stumbled upon this too in deeming sacrifice the base reality. But I reckon "The Symposium" implied it first in figuring love to be truly preexistent.
>>24945823Complete BS.
>>24946757Based
Man, you're right, Aristotleanon. Christian apologists are the worst when it comes to anally raping the Aristotelian corpus beyond recognition. They don't fucking understand anything. They don't understand dunamis, they don't understand energeia, they don't understand Metaphysics Zeta, they don't understand syllogisms, and they definitely do not understand the four causes. I just had apologist tell me, definitively, that Palamas was a top scholar of Aristotle (lmfao), and that De Anima isn't about life at all, since according to Palamas, only human beings have life because you somehow need "intelligence" to be "self-subsistent" (fucking LOL). Even when you read Aquinas's commentary on passages like the controversial active intellect, you can see him at pains to make the active intellect cohere with the passive intellect into one united soul. And then he fails to do so. But then magically says "but it has to be the case, and so it is." I ask another apologist, is an intellect which becomes everything, something which changes or otherwise remains as it is? And obviously, they short-circuit. Because obviously, that's the kind of intellect that we have, and it can't be active in any pure sense. So Aquinas is wrong and our intellects are perishable in the sense that it is soul. Oh the horror!!! These fucks have absolutely destroyed Peripatetic commentary throughout history, and they polluted literally everything, especially the translations, with the most hamfisted articulations possible to the point where intelligent conversations with them are not possible. Their brains are wrapped in verbal poison. If you ever get caught up in it, you basically have to spend years unlearning Scholastic hackery as it pertains to the deepest parts of the Aristotelian thought to even have a CHANCE at beginning to understand its depths.
>>24947161Palamas doesn't say any of that. You are either misinformed or getting your terminology mixed up. Only humans are a hypostasis. Only humans participate in the divine energies through the possession of a nous. Animals have an essence. There are logoi for animals. They participate in the Logos in the more limited way of the rest of nature. They are ensouled beings. They have merely natural participation/energies. So, you might get something like "Animals only act, only man truly lives," out of this, but you're profoundly misreading this or reading someone who has.
>>24947161>they polluted literally everything, especially the translations, with the most hamfisted articulations possible to the point where intelligent conversations with them are not possible. Their brains are wrapped in verbal poison.Not limited to aristotelianism, they're like this with everything intellectual. They are cancer.
>>24947178Anon, you're right that most commentators sought to repurpose Aristotle for their own projects. But it's another thing entirely for people to *not be aware* that they're diverging from Aristotle, and to not recognize that there are problems from diverging from the implied Aristotelian position, partisan solutions that are even worse than the aporias suggested by the original position. To treat everything as if it were all tightly-wrapped in a bow from Aristotle to Aquinas to fucking Palamas is just insanity to me. >>24947186I don't feel the direct impact of Middle Platonists, Arabs, and Jews on the vocabulary and thought-patterns utilized by Christian sophists. So it doesn't bother me so much. >>24947202Palamas:>The soul of each animal not imbued with intelligence is the life of the body that it animates; it does not possess life as essence, but as activity, since here life is relative and not something in itself. Indeed, the soul of animals consists of nothing except that which is actuated by the body. Thus when the body dissolves, the soul inevitably dissolves as well. Their soul is no less mortal than their body, since everything that it is relates and refers to what is mortal. So when the body dies the soul also dies. (Topics of Natural and Theological Science and on the Moral and Ascetic Life: One Hundred and Fifty Texts, 31)What am I supposed to make of that? This is abysmal, perhaps even retarded, especially if we're supposed to take this as some kind of Aristotelian commentary. If it's something different, then fine, be my guest, but this is like taking the entirety of Book II of De Anima and throwing it into the furnace. And even on those merits, it is bad, because nothing is truly self-subsistent except for God if we're going to play that game.
>>24947161As opposed to our brilliant era of "telos as a strongly emergent physical property" or a mere catagorical and an "Aristotleian" philosophy built solely off a few parts of the Ethics?Anyhow, what is your objection. Do you think Averoese got it more right? I'ma side with Plato here either way (and thus I guess with Palamas).
>>24947223First, you're presenting a strawman caricature. If anything, the tendency in the East is to underemphasize the influence of Pagan thought.Second, the Middle Platonists and Islamics profoundly shaped the reception of Aristotle in the West, so they definitely shape discourse up to this day. Indeed, a key reason why the Orthodox read Aristotle so differently is precisely because Islamic/Jewish thought had a far deeper influence on Scholastic thought. In the high scholastic period Aristotle was just "the Philosopher" but Avicenna was also "the Commentator.">What am I supposed to make of that?That animals don't have a nous or immortal soul. In context, this is explained in terms of different ways of participating in the divine energies.
Best book to understand the AI phenomenon in depth, mathematical precision, and comprehensive detail?
>>24945877basically i want to build an uncensored intelligent chatbot for loneliness purposes
This will tell you how all those cool ai models work: https://keras.io/examples/In order to actually understand it you should also read some introduction to fitting neural networks, which you will find somewhere on the internet on a university's homepage. A little bit of math beyond high school level helps but isn't strictly necessary.
>>24947098If a big tech investor went out of his way to understand how these AI models work, would he short or double down on his investments?
>>24947109Even if a billionaire ai investor reads the latest ai papers for breakfast he still can't reliably predict the future of ai. Maybe it will soon replace all human intellectual work or maybe the technology will get stuck and remain the fun but not very useful curiosity it is now. I personally think that ai will be cheap and most ai startups will fail because the technology is so open and everyone can setup their own cheap service.
>>24945781Probably be faster and better to watch YouTube videos on this.
Sometimes ancient ancestors show up in my dreams and share their wisdom with me, pointing out if I should or should not be doing a certain thing. Some other times my sleeping consciousness passes by their realm and they greet me when they sense me there, then I return to the realm of the living. Books about this?
>>24942606Feels like Jung or Eliade should have something for you.Maybe look up Native American authors who have written about spiritualism and dreams. They love that shit but I don’t know how much is actually written down by them.
>>24942841It's not spooky, I consider it very pleasant.>>24944250Maybe, but I have also learned a lot of things on this board.
You should probably read your prescription
>>24945125You do that
>>24944250>>24945103I once dreamt that a relative of mine who died many years ago was watching me browse a match thread for some premier league game on /sp/ and was disgusted by what was in the thread and by me reading it. I woke from the dream with a strong sense of shame.I haven't been on /sp/ since then.
>completely dismantles leftism in your path
>>24946541Ok big man, Im sticking to the slop they serve as takeout, you keep sticking to the slop they serve on pornhub
>>24946828Whats that supposed to mean, ranjesh?
>>24946755holy anarkiddie cope
>>24947129>Capitalist refusing the left a place on the leftPuke.
>>24944150>sade is a conceptual starting point for leftismI can tell already that it's retarded
Good night frens.Tell me your:>favorite poet>favorite playwright>favorite composerSo I have some new comfy suggestions.
>>24944762Through Evernight he back was borneon black and roaring waves that rano'er leagues unlit and foundered shoresthat drowned before the Days began,until he heard on strands of pearlwhere ends the world the music long,where ever-foaming billows rollthe yellow gold and jewels wan.He saw the Mountain silent risewhere twilight lies upon the kneesof Valinor, and Eldamarbeheld afar beyond the seas.A wanderer escaped from nightto haven white he came at last,Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>24940941William BlakeWilliam ShakespeareDvorak
ScriabinScriabinScriabin
>>24940941>Wagner>Wagner>Wagnerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLAxoXMpK5o
>>24940941gn
This was fire.
>>24945670I hate Warhammer, but you sound like an insecure overweight non white retard.
I wasn't much impressed with the first book so I never bothered with the other two. It might be that I wasn't expecting (and wasn't in the mood for) a detective story
>>24945668Picrel is the better series about the inquisition tbdesu
currently reading it, it's honestly solid. the first one was decent. the second one i haven't finished yet, but it seems to be better.
IIRC the second was better than the first, but the third kind of spedrun eisenhorn's arc too quickly. I preferred the ravenor spinoff series
Can developing the habit of reading heal my brain from years of doomscrolling, porn addiction and isolation that deleted my attention span, memory and gave me a costant brainfog?
>>24947156There's literally one sentence near the end that says he chose to take a multivitamin and an omega 3 supplement, presumably fish oil, and he doesn't even suggest it, you nut case. It's mostly not about nutrition at all.Though I do agree most supplements aside from whey, vitamin D and possibly omega-3s, are in general a waste of money and just make for expensive piss.
>>24947167Shut the fuck up, retard. Nobody is growing their own vegetables and fruit. Soil depletion factory farming, selective breeding/cultivars and bioengineering to some degree are real issues, but you can find healthy food in any grocery store in America if you're not an idiot.I hope you get a parasite from raw milk, you LARPing schizo.
>>24947189Dude literally 40% of americans have active home gardens
>>24947194Yeah, I do, too. I grow tomatoes. You know how much time, effort, money and SPACE, it would take to grow even HALF of your fruit and vegetable intake? Get real.
>>24938406beer
Sapient Species, Races, and Miscellaneous Sapients EditionFAQ:>What is worldbuilding?Worldbuilding is the process of creating entire fictional worlds from scratch, all while considering the logistics of these worlds to make them as believable as possible. Worldbuilding asks questions about the setting of a world, and then answers them, often in great detail. Most people use it as a means of creating a setting or the scenery for a story.>"Isn't there a Worldbuilding general in >>>/tg/ already?"Yes, there is. However, that general is focused on the creation of fictional worlds for the intended purpose of playing TTRPG campaigns. Here you can discuss worldbuilding projects that are not meant to be used for a roleplaying setting, but for novels, videogames, or any other kind of creative project.>"Can I discuss the setting of my campaign here, though?"If you want to, but it would probably be better to discuss it on >>>/tg/ . We don't allow the discussion of TTRPG mechanics, however. If you want to discuss stats or which D&D edition is best, this is not the place.>"Can I talk about an existing fictional setting that is not mine?"Yes, of course you can!>"Does worldbuilding need to be about fantasy and elves?"Worldbuilding, as already stated above, and contrary to what many believe, does not inherently imply blatantly copying Tolkien. In fact, there are many science-fiction setting out there, and even entire alternative history settings which do not possess supernatural elements at all. Any kind of science fiction book has an implied setting at least, which involves a certain degree of worldbuilding put into it.Old Thread: >>24748733
>>24945803>Probability/Fate magicManipulation of chance, luck, and causality. Subtle at times, direct at others. There are several fields like this, the product of great mages who did not spread their life's work. While they can be considered "major" in that they are complete schools of magic encompassing all the things one might need magic to do, they are neither widely known nor widely practiced. This is both good and bad. Lack of public knowledge means lack of progress, but it also means that your abilities are unknown.>HumanImpossibly rare, but ubiquitous at the same time. The process of creating a mana circle is human magic, after all.The number of people who have truly studied human magic can be numbered on one hand.
If I have one principle for my own world, it's that I'll never make a DnD style magic system.
I can't even imagine a future where the United States could have a peer opponent that could give them a real fight. Rome had Persia, Britain had France and then Germany, Athens had Persia, but who could be the weaker but close enough enemy that could let America show off?
>Plan on a low fantasy setting with the big theme being a war breaking out between humans that are roughly on a late 1800s industrializing tech level and a species of intelligent flight capable humanoids with some similar attributes to birds of prey>The big theme is the difference between a species which had its culture formed through a dexterous hand and horizontal expansion vs. capable wings and vertical movement>There's no other sapient race and all the diversity will be done through several human powers and birdfolk factionsSo far there are a few roadblocks in this I'm not yet sure how to overcome:>Don't make this Pandora people vs. technological humanity>How do I make neither humans nor birdfolk too strong?>What do birdfolk feast on? They lend themselves to nomadism, do they have some sort of pastoral society?>What do they do with the sick, injured or disabled that cannot fly anymore? They're dead weight>How do I properly make birdfolk territorial without accidently steering into "Proud, arrogant elves" territory?>Why didn't humans and birdfolk clash before, and why didn't the birdfolk lose in constant civil wars given their nomadic structure?>How close to real life humanity can we pattern this before it becomes a turn of the century war with birds?>What would cause the war to break out in the first place?Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>24945851>If I have one principle for my own world, it's that I'll never make a DnD style magic system.Why precisely is that? And what would you recommend instead to someone looking to make their own system?
Continuing to read Goethe's Italian Journey, I've just finished up the section where he's in Venice. It's amazing how enchanted he is with the place. Having been to Venice myself, I suppose I can agree with him.I do think it's funny that it's 1786 and he's complaining about the garbage in the streets and how there's disgusting sewage that floods the walkways of the city at high tide. 240 years later nothing has changed.He also remarks on how Venice has diminished, that its power from its days of glory is weaker, and the whole Republic has begun to decay. I suppose this was less than 50 years before Napoleon swept in and just extinguished the Republic with one fell swoop.He sees a lot of plays while he's here. He enjoys the ones that depict everyday Venetians, and apparently, so do the Venetians themselves.He sees the famous horses at St. Mark's Basilica. I'm surprised he doesn't remark that they're from Constantinople; maybe that wasn't well-known in his time.
>>24945093Thanks for the book report anon (I mean it unironically)
>>24945093good
I enjoyed Paul Morand's and Joseph Brodsky's books on Venice
>>24945093god you sound like an insufferable pedantic faggott
Tell us what he says about italian women
What erotic literature has /lit/ been enjoying as of late? I quite enjoyed this one until the abrupt non-ending
>>24944529Crash is my favorite, besides Bataille of course. Ballard's prose is crazy, I'm still looking for something similar.
>>24944529porn
>>24944529The ending is definitely just a "fuck I have no way of ending this but also I can't just write 1200 pages of rambling sex scenes". I frankly respect it. Your first duty to your work is to get that shit out the door.
>>24945120>nuttingkek
>>24947272>All is a nuttingIt has to be a nom de plume.
>read a book>it's good>read it again>it's even goodername even one time this has happened
>>24943875That guy was in a Hair Club for Men infomercial before he was in Fargo.
>>24943875Reverend Insanity
>>24946447This.
My diary desu
>>24943875VERE ARE ZE BOOKS, LEBOVSKI??!?!!?!
I'm interested in a reading group focused on art books. Most you can get through your library if you can't afford them, or as PDF's from Anna'a Archive.To start with I'd like to go with Umberto Eco's On Beauty, and then On Ugliness, but I open to alternative suggestions for our starting book.The reading for the week will be posted Sunday if there are enough takersIf you want, although it's not necessary for participation, there will be linked to threads and so forth on the Criterion Club server under the visual-arts channel https://discord.gg/XhFGx57VKm
>>24946545Nah. I read Gardner's Art Through the Ages a decade ago and now I'm reading Janson's History of Art (the second edition in Norwegian for language practice) at my own pace.
From On Beauty
I would join probably, although I have never read any Eco, because I already think him to be a turbo midwit. I also want to throw in Roger Scruton as a suggestion
>>24946864Both Scruton and Eco are midwits and both have an intricate understanding of art and aesthetics
The entire docuseries is on youtubehttps://youtu.be/J3ne7Udaetg?si=3Pup49Z5T9sCSU45
What is there even left to read after him?? Why is his prose so good?
>>24946923>/tv/ user is a pseudShocking.
>>24946923
>>24946964>>24947005Samefagging and namecalling is pitiable. Keep being wooed and wowed by an obvious hack's hack works. I bet I'm better read, with a higher IQ and a more sophisticated humanist understanding of literature and the arts than you.
>>24947033I just know you pride yourself on the dullest pseudslop imaginable
>>24947080Like what? Stephen King? Is that the phantom that makes you feel good? The modernist I like is Yeats, and subsequently the post modernist I can enjoy (sometimes) is Cormac.
>he's literally me
>>24945605>People forget that Mary was the daughter of one of the only serious female philosophers in history>female philosopherNot important enough to remember, lol.
>>24944825Cool and t his just supports what I said above:>He's literally any human. For we can imagine that just like Frankenstein has abandoned his Monster after he created it and realized what he has done, so too God has abandoned humanity.
>>24945924Any human just wants a human friend or mate?
>>24946166Not wants, but needs. And that's what the main conflict is about.
>>24946869>t. has only saw movies and has never read it
