Is it true these books are basically exclusively read by fat, ugly women with low self esteem that long to be desired by men? There is no way anyone actually takes this slop seriously, right?
>NOOOOOOOO PLEASE STOP >TELL YOUR ARYAN WIFE TO GET OFF ME >NOOOOOOOOO DONT STICK IN PLEASE >AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH*hops off the edge of the pillow*fucking nazis like literally
>>24686263It made the rounds in English schools too although it wasn't assigned.>>24686701Yeah, Atwood was telling a parable about Iran.>>24687053The sex scene was supposed to be boring. Sex was Offred's job.
I like it when the wife of Erdogan wears red.That said, gals, what do you hold of the series and of the second book: testaments?
>>24687118>The sex scene was supposed to be boring. Sex was Offred's job.I didn't find it boring. There's some rivetting internal monologue: are we making love? Nope, no love here. Am I getting raped? Nope, I have a choice. I could go to the gulag instead. Are we fucking? Nope, I'm not fucking, I am just getting fucked. Yeah, that's it: i am just getting fucked.It's not there in the series. They went with show don't tell
anyone also reading pic related?
>The further you get out of line with your intentions, the more distrustful she will be of your actions and words. And the more distrustful she is, the more insecure she will feel and the creepier you become. For instance, if you approach a woman and stand there and talk about the weather, but you’re staring at her rack the whole time while licking your lips, then you will come cross as creepy. Your actions and words are completely out of line with your intentions and she can see that.>Even if you tell her honestly, “You have great tits,” you will be creepy. Not for lack of intention, but because she doesn’t know you and most women are not comfortable being sexual around men they don’t know. Trust takes time. She has to see that your actions line up with your intentions before she can feel comfortable exposing herself to you and making herself vulnerable.>Women have a lot more to lose from expressing their sexuality than men do. They make babies. We don’t. They get raped and/or sexually assaulted at a startlingly high rate. We don’t. They have five thousands years of sexist cultural history making them feel like a slut. We don’t.>The second you make them feel uncomfortable sexually is the second you become a creep and the second she’s finding an excuse to get away from you as fast as she can.>This is why vulnerability is so huge. When you’re vulnerable around someone you don’t know, it elicits trust in them and they will become more vulnerable toward you in return. The more vulnerable a woman is willing to be around you, the less likely you will be to creep her out.Is he right?
>>24687862Please stop posting here.
>>24682838Mystery Method is not a good book because it’s for pursuing 9-10s. Most guys haven’t even seen one
>>24682825Even though this guy is white and has statusmaxxed and moneymaxxed with his coping manuals, he still had to go to Brazil to get an ugly wife. This is because he is a 4-5 in terms of looks. Sexual/romantic attraction is not about attitude, confidence, intention or showing vulnerability, it is only about highly inherited, mostly immutable characteristics. He mentions that females have a high investment in reproduction, but does not realise that this causes them to seek the males of high genetic quality. Being a "creep" = being ugly.
>>24687954There is nothing wrong with this btw. Women are doing God's work. There is no bigger tragedy than another generation of ugly men.
>>24687962You fail to understand that the current state of things will produce just as many ugly men, for it allows ugly/low iq women to reproduce more than men who are better looking/more intelligent. Natural selection does not lead to an objectively "better result", if the environment is such that low iq or ugly people reproduce more, then they will be selected for.
In what languages have you already read a book (including petit prince )?
EnglishFrenchOld IcelandicJapaneseI want to learn Classical Chinese next
>>24685773Based post
>>24685398what is worth reading in dutch?
>>24686627>I read faster when I'm reading in English.same here. English has next to no grammar. It reads as easily as children's literature does in other languages.
German.Waj wudd juh wont tu ried bucks in lenwitsches sätt Untermenschen ßpiek -- like Polish or French or sätt bastärd of ä lengwitsch sätt is Inglisch?
If there are countless galaxies and potentially infinite universes, what is God's relationship to life that might exist elsewhere?
As absent and as invisible as it is on Earth. God has no favourites. No distinction. No taxonomy. Those were our inventions.
I'm sick of determinism. What books can convince me free will exists?
Freedom is not about having one's actions be underdetermined. Action that is determined by nothing would necessarily be random and arbitrary, the opposite of freedom. Freedom is the self-determining capacity to actualize and communicate the good. The biggest limits on freedom are ignorance and weakness of will.Man doesn't create himself from the aether; he is not self-moving. Neither is he wholly powerless over his own acts. One can be relatively more or less self-determining and self-governing, to the extent that one has unified oneself and is no longer ruled over by ignorance, passion, and the lower appetites.As Saint Augustine says: "...the wicked man, though a king, is a slave. And not only the slave of a single man, but what is worse, a slave of as many masters as he has vices."
>>24686848:-)
>>24686559>crass physicalist reductionismBrains are not consciousness i.e. your unconditioned awareness of the World. "Your ego" is just the body, not the true self.
>>24686533Literally just choose to believe in it. You have free will, you can do that.>y-you're just deterministically forced to think it's real! That doesn't count!1!Ok and? That means no one can ever convince me it isn't real. Checkmate atheists.
>>24686533Don't start with the soulless analytics on this question, that's for sure. They seem to think that freedom is either uncaused action (which is incoherent) or else it doesn't exist (which is a false dichotomy).
If God is eternally complete and self-sufficient, what motivation could there possibly be for creating a universe? Does creation imply a "need" or "desire" within God?
>>24687756I know you have ocd bro. I say random stuff like that when i have sudden desire to say bs
>>24687736>If God is eternally complete and self-sufficient, what motivation could there possibly be for creating a universe?THE LULZ CUNTWe are his rekd video.
>ifThat's a big if.
>>24687736This is the argument id bring to Spinozists
>>24687736Plotinus answers this.
>they're called oliphauntsTolkien really halfarsed this
>>24687665Correct, everyone is a simpering idiot except me.
>>24687405po tard do. boil em mash em stick em in a stew
>>24687427techniques died off and remerged at a latter date.
>>24687427Middle earth is third age Brazil
>You are the lord of the rings, FrodoTitle in the first page. Bravo
Hegel thread. I know a few of you niggers are reading the Phenomenology, where are you in the book and what do you think?
>>24686602Yes, Hegel is very overrated. Fichte is very underrated. But in general idealism is a dead end because man is not first, or, the essence of man is to know that he is not first.
This passage slays dogmatists. Hegel was such a rascal.Brain-fibres and the like, looked at as forms of the being of mind, are already an imagined, a merely hypothetical actuality of mind — not its presented reality, not its felt, seen, in short not its true reality. If they are present to us, if they are seen, they are lifeless objects, and then no longer pass for the being of mind. But its objectivity proper must take an immediate, a sensuous form, so that in this objectivity qua lifeless — for the bone is lifeless so far as the lifeless is found in the living being itself — mind is established as actual.The principle involved in this idea is that reason claims to be all thinghood, even thinghood of a purely objective kind. It is this, however, in conceptu: or, only this notion is the truth of reason; and the purer the notion itself is, the more silly an idea does it become, if its content does not take the shape of a notion (Begriff) but of a mere presentation or idea (Vorstellung)-if the self-superseding judgment is not taken with the consciousness of this its infinity, but is taken as a stable and permanent proposition, the subject and predicate of which hold good each on its own account, self fixed as self, thing as thing, while one has to be the other all the same.Reason, essentially the notion, is immediately parted asunder into itself and its opposite, an opposition which just for that reason is immediately again superseded. But if it presents itself in this way as both itself and its opposite, and if it is held fast in the entirely isolated moment of this disintegration, reason is apprehended in an irrational form; and the purer the moments of this opposition are, the more glaring is the appearance of this content, which is either alone for consciousness, or alone expressed ingenuously by consciousness.The “depth” which mind brings out from within, but carries no further than to make it a presentation (Vorstellung), and let it remain at this level — and the “ignorance” on the part of this consciousness as to what it really says, are the same kind of connexion of higher and lower which, in the case of the living being, nature naïvely expresses when it combines the organ of its highest fulfilment, the organ of generation, with the organ of urination. The infinite judgment qua infinite would be the fulfilment of life that comprehends itself, while the consciousness of the infinite judgment that remains at the level of presentation corresponds to urination.
>>24686667He is saying that materialist philosophy is like pissing and idealism is the other one.
>>24686667
Hopefully it’ll be slow at work and I can finish my second reading of PoS. Then I’ll be an absolute knower, in layman’s terms, a mage. I swear he wrote the last section dense af to discourage people from skipping to the end.
Can the term "exists" even be meaningfully applied to God? Since "existence" is a category within the universe, does saying "God exists" place God within creation rather than as the ground of all being?
>>24687773
if god created everything that exists, who created everything that doesnt exist
>>24687773Time to read Buddhism mate.
>>24687773>Can the term "exists" even be meaningfully applied to God? Yes. Existence is not contingent on God
>>24687773Read the paper "Into the Dark" by Eric Perl. He addresses exactly this with the apophaticism of Plotinus, Proclus and Aquinas
meereenese throne editionASOIAF wiki: https://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Main_PageBlog: https://georgerrmartin.com/notablog/Old blog: https://grrm.livejournal.com/So Spake Martin (interviews): https://westeros.org/citadel/ssm/Book search: https://asearchoficeandfire.com/SSM search: https://cse.google.com/cse?cx=006888510641072775866:vm4n1jrzsdyGeneral search: http://searcherr.work/TWOW samples: https://archive.org/details/411440566-the-winds-of-winter-released-chaptersold: >>24667075
>>24687918>"When King's Landing fell, Ser Jaime slew your king with a golden sword, and I wondered where you were.">"Far away," Ser Gerold said, "or Aerys would yet sit the Iron Throne, and our false brother would burn in seven hells."What did he mean by this?
So Rhaegar thought he was birthing THE prophecy baby when he absconded with Lyanna right? Cause if he just needed a third kid he could’ve easily chosen some minor noble, or even a fucking whore. What was his thought process?
>>2468793714yo horsegirl pussy
>>24687929For once, it is a dream. It is quite unlikely that the real exchange was as poetic as we see it. Secondly, being Rhaegar loyalist does not mean overthrowing Aerys. Rhaegar coup seems to be pure Aerys paranoia, in actuality Rhaegar and his dudes were doing his thing while patiently waiting for Aerys to die in his sleep and just politely recognizing his legitimate authority until then.
>>24687943This doesn't sound like they were waiting for Aerys to die in his sleep.>Rhaegar had put his hand on Jaime's shoulder. "When this battle's done I mean to call a council. Changes will be made. I meant to do it long ago, but . . . well, it does no good to speak of roads not taken. We shall talk when I return."
Why do men find female authors so trite and boring? I've known well-read dudes who don't read women as a rule just because they feel like they're being subtly nagged or something.
>>24677272I've only read two novels written by women since I've taken reading as a hobby about a year ago, Frankenstien and Jane Eyre. Frankenstien didn't give that vibe at all, probably because it's from a man's perspective, but with Jane Eyere, while I did enjoy it, it definitley felt a bit like that especially towards the end when she has to choose between St. John and Rochester. Kinda gave me the ick cause it read so female fanfic with a side of moralizing.
>>24682623Yeah, I don't see a woman ever coming up with something like Donne's "A Valediction - Forbidding Mourning" or anything by D. H. Lawrence.
>>24687761Though if I wanted to be fair, I always felt like that in literature about love written by men, the woman in question almost never matters as a person but rather as an avatar of femininity, as if it was the thing that the woman embodied to them that these men truly loved and less that one woman specifically, who were quite indistinguishable and interchangeable when discussed at all. I suspect women love much the same way, however. Maybe there is truly only one Man and one Woman that we love regardless of whoever happens to be their representative at a certain time and place.
Mfw litfags shilling Shelley despite ~90% of it having been written by Percy
>>24687887That's a nice cope, but I don't think you're going to convince anyone. You can't even convince yourself.
I really like stories set small town of America. The ones that I know are the Green Town trilogy of Ray Bradbury (Something Wicked This Way Comes, Dandelion Wine, and Farewell Summer). There is also Riverdale from the Archie comics. Gravity Falls, Oregon from the cartoon Gravity Falls. It seems small town settings are quite good for all kind of genres from comedies, adventures, mystery, thriller, romance, etc. Themes of unchangingness versus change, innocence versus growing up, home vs the world, all seem to prop up in these kind of stories which I really enjoy.And I want to read more books that utilize this setting. So any recommendations, /lit/?
>>24685081sinclair lewis - main street
>>24685274Yeah, Updike is the undisputed kang of small town America.
>>24685081Faulkner is required for the Yoknapatawpha County literary universe, but it is also distinctly southern, not generic american small town.
>>24686975no, that's not it either
>>24685274>>24687535What's Updike?
how do you guys feel about this one
i'm a fan. had me in stitches. i enjoyed this audiobook.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4Q3UsA3F-k
Had it sitting on my shelf for years but always had something more interesting to read first
Perhaps I didn't get far enough into it but it gets so repetitive for me. I get it's the catch-22 but every page is filled with catch-22s that it gets tiresome to read for me. I've tried reading it three times and I can still never get past the first ~150 pages.
>>24686973Fun desu.
>>24686973very funny book written by a jew.
>>24687061Bukowski's Post Office is not believable. He only takes 6 months of unauthorised sick leave off due to alcoholism and does not drink nearly enough.1/10: not realistic, insufficient alcoholism._t. postal delivery officer.
The Ginger Man.
My stepdad's diary desu. It's not really a diary. It's a collection of .txt files in a folder marked "secret" on his 2004 desktop PC. He caught me looking once and he beat my ass with a fire poker. Just about shook my bones like a christmas tree. Then he went into my sisters room and
>>24687038Steppenwolf
IJ
I keep seeing people talk about Postmodernism in relation to literary analysis, especially Pynchon, but I don't get it. Is it just a pretentious way of saying "words can mean anything you want"? It seems like a total meme. Help a brainlet out.
literally just means the story doesn't follow the conventional style, it has almost nothing to do with the philosophical "post-modernism". Oedipa doesn't find out if the conspiracy is actually real vs a more traditional story where it all gets tied up with a bow and she solves the case
>>24687795Bateman. Batman isn't nearly psychotic enough.
>>24686201Or are you frustratingly expressing your latent homosexuality?
>>24687823Which stems from what Lyotard called the loss of faith in grand narratives. Life doesn't have all the answers, and there isn't necessarily one correct way to act or observe or live, so this reflects in the writing as questioning the premises of storytelling and the moral frameworks that were in place still in modernist writing.
>>24686170Fiction that serves primarily as commentary
