After seeing the catfights go on over the past year, I decided to read the book for myself. Joe Sachs translation. Fantastic book. The autist in me loved Metaphysics Delta in particular. But I felt like I left with more questions than answers. I feel like the topic that Aristotle dealt with goes beyond what it means for something to be universal or particular, and it seems like Aristotle thought that essence is a form that is neither universal nor particular. But Aristotle made it clear that boilerplate Platonism does not logically work, although Sachs makes an effort in his footnotes to point out that something like Platonism can still be salvaged. I also don't know how we can think of the active intellect aka the unmoved mover as the pure being-at-work of thinking with its object being itself. How can it be akin to wakefulness or meaningfully compared with anything we call thinking when our own wakefulness relies on a capacity or a power to be moved, something that the unmoved mover does not have? It seems like such an austere concept that we might as well treat it as the thinnest, brute fact aspect of being that we were looking for all along.Idk. Thoughts?
>>24850458Barnes is the only one I've read and it's perfectly fine, very literal. His commentary sucks though. I know how retarded that sounds, some random anon criticizing a great scholar, but he really did not understand, partly I think because he never read any of the Arabs. He thinks the syllogism is a deductive argument and this is fatal to understanding the Organon. The Greeks themselves did not understand the Analytics, it's an absolute cunt of a book, the sketchiest thing Aristotle wrote. I've heard good things about Apostle and he seems highly congenial to me, like I know he is critical of Barnes, but haven't read it. Aquinas' commentary is useful in the sense that he explains the structure of the work - there is a method to Aristotle's apparent madness. But on some of the details he is wrong, partly because his translation was bad, partly because he relies on a bad commentary (Philoponus). Still for a crutch to help you figure out wtf is going on in some of the trickier passages you could do worse than Aquinas.>Well, it's just very confusing to see how the Platonic bent isn't in line with the anti-becoming aspect of Aristotle's "resting of the intellect" here, unless perhaps you are suggested that Aristotle is flanking Plato from Platonism (i.e. if Plato's anamnesis is like a potency of sorts from an earlier actuality, Aristotle's anamnesis never posits a forgetting and was always actual from the very beginning).I might be misunderstanding you but the 'coming to rest' aspect doesn't have to do with our 'already knowing' whatever we come to know, it's just a psychological observation about how when we know something we 'rest' in our knowledge of it. When I know something my intellect as such is not in motion in any way; if it was moving, I wouldn't be knowing that thing.
>>24850486Yes, and it is about knowledge, and he says this right at the start of the Analytics. There are passages certainly that do talk about pedagogy (thesis vs. hypothesis and so on) but the subject of the work is episteme. I don't care to argue about it if you think otherwise, you're wrong and should read it again, the evidence is absolutely overwhelming and literally every single Aristotelian that I have ever read, besides whatever modern jackass may have influenced you, agrees with me.
>>24850506>I might be misunderstanding you but the 'coming to rest' aspect doesn't have to do with our 'already knowing' whatever we come to know, it's just a psychological observation about how when we know something we 'rest' in our knowledge of it. When I know something my intellect as such is not in motion in any way; if it was moving, I wouldn't be knowing that thing.I'm just confused as to how can there be a rest without implying something was in motion (and now no longer is not), a "coming" to rest without a becoming of some kind. Unless all this motion is merely incidental to knowledge, which imparts its own change, then I don't see how it doesn't imply that the knowledge wasn't always there, merely obscured by disorder or something. It seems to me like Aristotle's trying to push some angle of Platonic anamnesis yet holds back in some way. Idk. I need a better explanation. >>24850514No I think you're right. Any teaching is ultimately about knowledge and its transfer so I don't even know why someone would be so fixated on something so obviously ancillary and minor.
>>24850506>>24850514>>24850546Thank you anon, I've decided that I'm gonna read Posterior Analytics and learn more about this science. Originally, I was going to read De Anima, but it seems like my answer to how the mind understands forms and coming up with a "science of forms" will best be understood here more than anywhere else. I have some old questions though, that I'd love if you could briefly answer each (I know it's a lot, just throwing it out there) before I start reading: Does the presentation of the arguments in Posterior Analytics affect the necessity of the arguments therein? Why or why not? What is the being of a syllogism? What would we lose in Posterior Analytics and elsewhere in the Aristotelian corpus if its conclusions were not seen as necessary?To what extent does an argument need to be isomorphic with its object? Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>24850514>>24850506>erratic schizo back-and-forth between helpful, overly familiar, and insanely angryI guarantee you this guy is a drunk. Pretty sure he has alluded to heavy drinking in the past, too.
the last time I felt something reading anything post-WWII was about a year and a half ago when I picked this up. didn't make it past the first few hundred pages because of personal reasons and I never really got back to it. not Houellebecq, not no Knausgård or Beckett, not even Bernhard whom I consider to be a true titan of 20th c. literature, one I absolutely regret not being able to read in the original German, made as immediate an impression on me as Gaddis' condensed, surchargé, relentless prose. In fact, of all the authors mentioned above and their underlying projects that served as both the means and ends of their respective œuvres, Gaddis' encyclopedic approach, while not as interesting as Beckett's linguistic fragmentation as catharsis or the political predictor/provocateur whoremonger Houellebecq, seems to me the most efficient. Knausgård, just to say a few words on him and authors of the same strain en passant, the yuppie, stream-of-consciousness, refuses-to -acknowledge-they-read, or maybe even unironically chooses to not read any classics for fear of losing "voice", or some similar effeminate notion, is just that: effeminate. I don't see how the novel as a form can progress beyond encyclopedic doorstoppers.
>>24850240what's your credit score
>>24848506>>24849951>>24850191>>24850243a blight on this board. all of you (but most likely a single poster) posturing as cynical og 4channers, adding nothing to the conversation and chimping out for (You)s. >it's givingyou know you don't HAVE to comment, right?it was a nice effortpost from what seems to me a fairly intelligent reader, who has his own opinions and points of reference. the observation about leading the reader to Christ being the intention of the author was illuminating.
>>24850431>waaahh waaahhh why won't the other kids play nice wahhhh
>>24850431worry not. that's my son. my cruelty and negativity has all but murked up this board for days. those are the consequences of my actions made flesh. love you for defending me, though. very kind.
>>24850191>it's givingRetarded faggot.
Can rap lyrics be /lit/?
They can be litty.
ayyyy ye ye it do fr
>>24850700No. Your post is off-topic.
Not music.
Eminem raps in iambic pentameter so it's at least as literary as Elizabethan sonnets are.
>ermm anon why don't you have a single female author in your book case? >but you have all the Pynchons? Seriously??? Are you literally an incel or something?
>>24850168Liv?
>>24847622No, becky, I am a homosexual, and since you lied to me about having a giant girlcock, I would appreciate it if you left my apartment.
>>24848319Most Jews in America are according to every survey. They have the same rates of Zionism as American Christians
>>24847622I have several books by women authors, and I have never read Pynchon and I'm proud of it.
Only femoid author I ever liked was Evelyn Waugh. All the rest were pure fucking cancer.
The idea of an "ultimate fate of the universe" is a lie spread to keep the masses in line. There is no heat death. All of the literature on this topic is incorrect.Every book written on the topic of the "ultimate fate of the unverse" is full of propaganda meant to threaten and terrify the masses.Dark energy decays into dark matter, and dark matter decays into baryonic matter.
>>24850513>dark energy decays into dark matter, and dark matter decays into baryonic matterthat’s not what any observational data supports. Dark energy is, as far as we can tell, a constant or quasi-constant energy density driving cosmic acceleration. There’s no empirical evidence it decays into anything. Dark matter also appears remarkably stable; if it were decaying into ordinary (baryonic) matter at any noticeable rate, we’d see specific gamma ray or neutrino signatures. We do not.
>>24850513Heat death of the universe isn't going to happen, that's the atheist's "God is dead" solution. You're getting a Big Crunch, a return of everything to its creator and you're going to like it. Science will eventually catch up to what religion has known for thousands of years and when it does you'll remember this post.
>>24850655>muh empirical evidencewell then formulate more hypotheses find more ways to test for them. you faggots are a disgrace to science, the nihilism put out by this field plays right into the religionfags hands. science should be a progressive institution
>>24846232this is actually insanely interesting. reading up on this guy right now. these entelechies- their compossible parts are essentially volitional entities in their own right.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91gT68xeDMM
>>24848602>hence why neither want to read Bergson, Whitehead or SantayanaThe only reason why I haven't read Bergson is because he got eternally btfo'd by Einstein on the question of time, Whitehead got retroactively btfo'd by Parmesan cheese and a guenon monkey, and Santayana because he just strikes me as one of those guys known for quick, witty quotes that people like to share on X (and previously on Fagbook) like "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" and "Fanaticism consists in redoubling your effort when you have forgotten your aim".idk, once I hit Heidegger and Wittgenstein, reading any more philosophy just felt kind of pointless, so I decided to go for learning a trade instead (I chose to become a sparky).
>>24850086>once I hit Heidegger and Wittgenstein, reading any more philosophy just felt kind of pointless, so I decided to go for learning a trade insteadGood choice. Don't go anywhere near philosophy books, they clearly aren't meant for a dense midwit such as yourself
>>24845505>checking out 10 books a day from my local library
Is it worth it except for the pictures?
>>24849836and you bury your face within the comfort of the dirt
>>24849836atrocious post. imagine filtering yourself this badly.
Jung - Red bookWagner - Brown bookGaddafi - Green bookwhat else?
>>24848873The middest of wits.
vaugely related but I started doing active imagination why does no one talk about this shit it's insane, i don't get why people read the red book you are supposed to actually do it yourself
Best novels by women1. Eliot, 'Middlemarch'2. Burney, 'Cecilia'3. Brontë, 'Wuthering Heights'4. Austen, 'Persuasion'5. Rhys, 'Good Morning Midnight'6. Woolf, 'The Waves'7. Shelley, 'Frankenstein'
>>24849282>1. Eliot, 'Middlemarch'wasn't this the same woman who was seething about austen novels for being too girly? unironic pick me behavior
>>24849880>noooooo you can't critique another woman in any way, ESPECIALLY if you're a womaninteresting
>>24849904learn to read tourist. she criticised austen bitching about being too unrealistic and "femenine". charlotte bronte made better criticism without sounding like a pretentious twat
>>24849875Toni Morrison is not a good writer.
>>24849282>best shits by dogs
What am I in for?
A long face.
>>24850409Pure Kino
where are all the contemporary conservative philosophers?
Conservatives spend all their time in a futile attempt to make the clock run backwards and blaming the other for their various spiritual and sexual failimgs.
>>24847254>philosophy without epistemic humilityNow that's a fucking disaster waiting to happen.I bet these people are Act-Utilitarians too.
>>24849075this
>>24847231first philosopher death to make me genuinely very sad >where are theyconservatives are liberals still so they aren't significantly different from left wing onesfew are brave enough to deny the concept of rights and human dignity in toto like mactinyre. Charles taylor is the other one, hubert dreyfus might fall under this but he seems to mostly not talk about potlics apart from random asides in his book that point to "yeah my views might allow a hitler to take power". The traditionalist/view of man as autochthonous seems like a view lots of people do point to, however one of the natural conclusions of that is universities as such and academia as it exists now is basically evil. (As earlier existentialists like nieztsche/heidegger pointed to) The ones who go down that path ala heidegger come to the conclusion our culture situation is so fucking bad doing philosophy is basically pointless, so mcluhan & heidegger would recommend people do art instead and that's where you get people like Terrence Malick. There's the whole Catholic philosophy sphere and they are doing some interesting stuff but I would largely say they aren't being very good "philosophers" they are more just refining very particular issues and avoiding difficult ones.(how to respond to the machine, things like race/ethnicity, language, etc.) There are some more obscure ones. https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-about-Veritas-James-Madden/dp/1666754188I quite liked this one, which was basically entirely ignored when it came out. He has gotten some popularity because he has made an effort to apply someone of the philosophy of mind stuff to ufology as a way to shill his ideas. Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>24849032embarrassing post
When you read a book, do you visualize the landscape and the people, like a movie scene flowing through your mind?
This thread actually makes me wonder if some people don't enjoy reading plays or even fiction in general just because they can't imagine what's happening.
>>24847693This is exactly how I operate. I've had running stories or 'scenes' that I day dream or think about before bed. I add little bits or change bits, I don't write it down though. I just remember it all.
>>24842322I can't see or hear anything at all. For me, the main part of the enjoyment I get from reading is how the author is using language, as well as the concepts he's coming up with. I don't like film adaptations of books I've liked, because they're so slow compared to my reading speed and they (by necessity) miss out the myriad of small details and prose quirks of the author. It's just a film and I know the actors are just actors and everything is fake. With text, it feels as real as any of my memories are, because I have no ability to visualise those either. When I think back to things that have happened to me in the past, I'm essentially describing those events to myself in prose. My pet theory of aphantasia is that it's a fundamentally different "operating system" that a certain percentage of people are running.
>>24842322I don't tend to visualise as I'm reading, I just read and remember the words. When I'm thinking about certain scenes afterwards they'll manifest visually without needing to think of the words.
>>24847078>I usually imagine the characters as actors I’ve seen in movies or people I’ve known.exactly the same for me, sometimes when a new character is introduced i need to stop for a few minutes in order to find the right match so the movie in my head can go on
>writes a juvenile book with simple black and white morality for children>filled with plotholes>bad guys are all cartoonishly evil and have no redeeming features>80 years later manchildren still think he's a geniusIs he the biggest hack to ever hack? Being an adult fan of Tolkien is the easiest way to tell someone is low IQ.
Shut up, bitch.
>>24846292I agree that the fanbase is terrible. Tolkien isn't a hack writer and LotR is not a bad book, but it's a good book for children and adults enjoying it is a red flag.I read LotR at age 8 and I liked it at the time. That's probably the appropriate age for it.Adult fans of LotR, more broadly high fantasy in general, are something I'll never understand.
>>24849844you sound like an insecure faggot. go read the silmarillion and then tell me if it's supposed to be read by grade schoolers.
>>24849376/lit/ (and 4chan as a whole) is full of pseudo-intellectuals who think hating popular things makes them cool. GRRM isn't a hack, but you can't see the real genius of his work unless you have 160+ IQ and high-functioning autism like Preston Jacobs. he tells a parallel story in the history of the noble houses, and their relation to the story requires reading between the lines and careful study, which the pseuds of /lit/ can't pick up on, so they call GRRM a "hack"
>>24849459Top kek.Gurmtrannies completely destroyed.
I need an electornic word processor that>cannot EVER connect to the internet>can manage, import, and export text files via usb>has little to no other functionThere's too much shit on my laptop to distract me from writing. I realize there's pen and paper but I don't want to have to rewrite everything I've already written. Any recommendations?
Nigga just get a typerwriter and fax it if you need to nothings going to be as good as that.You’re just hyperfixating on some retard issues so you have an excuse to not write. Typewriters are fairly cheap and u can fax em if you need to or whatever tf
>>24842178>>24842191Holy shit this is hilarious, lazy retards will do anything except sit down and actually write lmao
>>24850358Yep. They externalize their flaws. Such people will never be successful.
>>24842178honestly at this point just use this setup as a virtual machine. SInce it has no GUI it wont need much resources and you wont have to reboot when you'll need to do research.
>>24850473the whole point of the setup is to avoid being able to simply open a web browser to avoid distraction.>>24850358>>24850364lol stop being a pathetic samefag.. we get it, you're better than us and have superior discipline and attention spans and we're all very impressed.
The most badass kid's book in the world.
I assume that, to better understand greek literature, its historical background must be studied first. What is the list of major events that shaped ancient Greece in this context?
~1200 BC: the late bronze age collapse. Total civilization reset in the entire Greek cultural sphere. The old dominant Mycenaean culture, as well as what remnants of Minoans existed, all vanished violently in the chaos of the collapse. The old cultures of Greece would only be recalled through myths and legends recorded in later centuries. ~1200 BC - 750 BC: the Greek dark ages. So-called because there is very little written evidence from this period, it is "dark" in the historical record, not because people were more primitive (except perhaps in the faculty of literacy). There's archeological evidence of what went on here, and it suggests small (less than 1000 people) settlements scattered throughout the Peloponnese which saw people gradually re-urbanizing toward the end of the period. Again, not much written down here, but its thought to be when the original versions of myths like the Iliad were formed.~750-500 BC: the Archaic Age. This is where a lot of the persistent cultural identities and myths were created. New writing systems emerge in the 8th century BC and this is also when Homer himself is thought to have lived. The Iliad is believed to be a mythologized record of a real war in the late bronze age collapse, with the historical city of Troy now known to have stood in western Anatolia being destroyed (several times) during that time period. This is also the time period that we first see the "Dorian Invasion" be mentioned by Greek sources, which is thought to be how the Greeks explained the massive cultural shift that occurred in the wake of the bronze age collapse. Modern scholars now doubt any such invasion occurred, but regardless it is what the Greeks believed to have happened so we must talk about it with regard to Ancient Greek culture and literature. City states like Sparta, for example, based their entire cultural identity on the Doric myth. 500-323 BC: Classical period of ancient Greece, so called because many of the great classical works which we associated with Greece date from this period, like Plato himself. The big breakthroughs in mathematics and philosophy occurred in this period, and it was also when Greece was breaking free of the grip of Persia at the start of it, around 500 BC. After shrugging off Persia, Athens and Sparta proceeded to contend with one another in the Peloponnesian War, whose conflict left them so mauled in the 4th century that the whole region was ripe for conquest by the Macedonians from the northwest. Alexander's conquest marks the end of the Classical era. 324-31 BC: post-Alexander Greece, known as Hellenic Greece, which lasted until the Roman annexation. This saw the absolute peak of Greekification of the Mediterranean and even the middle east and Egypt, and a lot of the later Greek philosophers and mathematicians emerged. Stoicism originated from this period, this was the age of geniuses like Archimedes and Euclid.
>>24850177You can find a nice introduction to all things greek in H.D.F Kitto's "The Greeks". It serves as a great introduction to Greek life, thought, history, and so on. From there on out you can go after whatever particular authors you find appealing, but if I may recommend you some:>Greek myths.A huge chunk of their literature and values stem from the myths. There's two major Mythologies you can go for.>Edith HamiltonNarrative oriented, with the poets, playwrights and historians of Rome and Greece. Very enjoyable, albeit not that complete.>Robert GravesMore academically oriented, and somewhat dull. Graves doesn't care much for a compelling narrative as he does for stating the facts. What makes Graves' version so important, is that half of the work is entirely quotes and sources that try to explain the historical setting of certain myths (Such as the rape of Europa).One thing to note however, his sources are all over the place, and certain details like Orpheus being a kiddy diddler are thrown in without a fully reliable source.From there on out, you have the classical historians.>Herodotus' HistoriesA mix of myth and history. Herodotus writes about a lot of characters that are reminiscent of old folk-tales, and you should see them as such. His comments on egypt highlight certain aspects of Greek life.>Thucydides, history of the Peloponnesian warComment too long. Click here to view the full text.
