Would anyone be interested in participating? Seems like a nice alternative to Wikipedia reading
>>24951220>post cover in OP>summarize topic using chapter headings>ask some questions at the endDo this and people will participate in your thread.
>Pessimist that actually killed himselfOther examples?
>>24950762Me
Albert Caraco
>>24950762me, myself and I
I like to read philosophy although I don't understand like 70% of what is written. Actually I like to read smart people, people with soulfulness, I like to learn the truth about reality even if I can't grasp it with most of the part.I'm currently reading Spengler's main work and it's good for the part I do understand.Thanks for reading my blog.
>>24949062If you're interested in Spengler read Vico and Herder too
>>24949062same here. i'm retarded but i do absorb some of the good parts.
>>24949062Xenophon Memorabilia
A lot of modern shit doesn't make sense because it is based on falsehoods and degenerate passions. They key thing to know is that one does not gain understanding merely by "being smart," reading the opinions of others, and arguing. This only leads to sophistries. The key tools of the lover of true wisdom are fasting, vigils, prayer, meditation, breath prayers and mantras, and all other manner of askesis.The teachings of the greats, who get at least something essential right, such as Plato, Laotze, Aristotle, or Epicetus are accessible even to the unlearned and simple, but they are also deep beyond fathoming. Of course, the fullness of revelation dwells in a deeper gnosis held by those saints who grew closest to the Logos.
>>24951262>fasting, vigils, prayer, meditation, breath prayers and mantras, and all other manner of askesisSome of these are useful in moderation, some are mostly useless.Mysticism has never achieved anything of substance. In rare cases, it can be hijacked as a symbol for an external creed, but it can also lead a society to a coma.
So has everybody on this board just read Fagles' Iliad translation? I know we're all actively avoiding Wilson's translation, and I never see Lattimore mentioned, so I assume for everybody on here the go-to is just Fagles.
>>24942800I'm with this anon. Seems like Green found the perfect mix of readability and translation accuracy by being close to the original meter but dropping it.
>>24949370>La colera o diosa barf
>>24949557His approach is very similar to Lattimore's, both use a mostly 6 beat line to imitate the 6 feet in Homeric meter. Lattimore is slightly looser, allowing himself to occassionally use 5 or 7 beat lines, which means he can get a better natural rhythm when it suits, and in a way it emulates the differing lengths of Homeric lines (a long syllable was equivalent to two short ones, so you could have between 12 and 17 total per line).Lattimore>and its devastation, which puts pains thousandfold upon the Achaians,>hurled in their multitudes to the house of Hades strong souls>of heroes, but gave their bodies to be the delicate feasting>of dogs, of all birds, and the will of Zeus was accomplishedGreen>calamitous wrath, which hit the Achaians with countless ills—>many the valiant souls it saw off down to Hādēs,>souls of heroes, their selves left as carrion for dogs>and all birds of prey, and the plan of Zeus was fulfilled
>>24951013>a long syllable was equivalent to two short ones
>>24951248In the second syllable of a foot of dactylic hexameter, yes.
>7 books completed>12 books behind schedule
>>24949373>43 books readAnd I read only 1-2 hours everyday. Feels gud man
>>24949373ngmi
>>24950372Same
>>24949373I TRIED SO HARDAND GOT SO FARBUT IN THE END IT DOESN'T EVEN MATTER
>>24950171they are separate books but they only take a couple hours to read
I've noticed that a lot of sophist philosophizing is based around this concept of "nonexistence". But it seems obvious that "nonexistence" just isn't a real thing right?How can something exist that by its own definition does not exist? It's just a nonsense idea made up of circular reasoning. There cannot exist a thing that doesn't exist. Everything that exists exists and there is nothing else. Existence by definition is an all encompassing concept. You can't logically accept that things exist and then turn around and say there are things that don't.And logically the concept of nonexistence is already nonsensical but if you believe in determinism the idea really just gets defeated many times over.
>>24951228>It still exists as something that transformed into something elseSo in other words it doesn't exist.
>>24951240I mean sure it "doesn't exist" which is to say "it's gone".But that's not "nonexistence". There's a difference between "it's gone" and "it was never here" see.It doesn't exist but it's not "nonexistent". It moved and changed which it could only do because it exists in the first place.
>>24951240This is megarian philosophy. You're 100% correct: when these people are pointing at something and saying it has become something else, theyre literally saying that "it is what it is not".Combine this with melissus, who points out that if we accept these stories of one thing becoming another, what we need to understand is that each thing will always be what it is. So we can say a piece of raw meat is raw meat, a piece of cooked meat is cooked meat, and these two can stand in some chronological relationship as part of some metaphysically-static eternalist continuum. But one must recognise that it is utter nonsense to say that a thing is what it is not, that the raw meat is the cooked meat. You are doing philosophy while the rest of the anons are clinging to the mere traces of prestigious failures like aristotle.
>>24951266So at some definite point in the gradient between raw and cooked it's objectively cooked? A completely different thing?You're playing with language not meaning, confusing the map and the territory.I cooked the meat, it was raw, now it's cooked. It's the same meat.
>>24951277You don't get it - the issue isn't with telling a story about raw meat and cooked meat, but rather you need to recognise that the raw meat is raw meat and the cooked meat is cooked meat and never is one the other (ie what it is not). If you want to place these two things along some gradient, where you tell a story about raw meat that gets hot and is cooked meat, that is ok. But you aren't talking about any one given data point (raw meat, cooked meat, heat, whatever). Rather, you are showing how they all hang together, subsumed in a complete story.The raw meat is and always will be raw meat. The cooked meat is and always will be cooked meat. Everything where it is, as it is, eternal and unchanging. Identity demands this. All you are doing is taking the different data points and discussing how they relate, not how a data point "is what it is not".It's not the same meat, except by convention. You can only define "same" here to mean different points that are in closer proximity than other points. If they were literally the same thing, they'd either be raw meat or cooked meat, because those two are different. The truth is to break through and recognise that the "persistent meat" is just you casting a net over two different details and treating them as a broader, subsuming entity. Just like reality is one big all-subsuming entity, of which everything is a detail.
Any recc.s for non-fiction books that aren't just a biography, or a dull reference/history of x book?
Dodge City
>>24948190
>>24948190Athos, or the Mountain of the Monks by Athelstan Riley. An 1886 travelogue in which an uppercrust Englishman takes his Anglican bishop friend on a trip to Mount Athos and its orthodox community. The first 50 pages are competitively scamming his way through Europe (and he is defeated by Bulgarians) and then unending complaints about everything and being an awful person to everyone he meets. He has silver-pressed opium pills to give to annoying natives so they'll leave him alone, goes in great tirades about the 'natural indolence of the greek oriental', torments the weak and continually abuses his position. He even escapes Athos by lying and waving a letter around claiming the Ottoman Sultan gave it to him - he is duelling with Turks looking for bribes in this instance. I can take or leave his descriptions of the monasteries and the churches but just reading about him, his friend and his trip is hilarious. Genuinely funny. I read something similar from an 1830 source, a British lieutenant, who was polite, respectful and utterly unremembered. I think Athelstan is remembered on the peninsula to this day for being a dickhead.
>>24949420>>24949454>>24950235neat, will flick through on internetarchive, see if its worth getting a physical copy
Is this the life all incels are so envious of? Truth is, most marriages were and still are much of hate towards the partner, if there is no passion to be found. And that happens for almost all couples if the other one is mentally unstable or otherwise literal child in a grown up body. Stoner was too good for Edith, but also a total loser for simping for her in the first place. They ruined each others lives and just kept going on with it. Also ruined the life of their child and made them an alcoholic. Can't tell if that life would be better than being without pussy desu (which Stoner did for most of his life anyway). So the question now is, how – if anyhow – should a man of intelligence pursue women? Just fuck a college pussy for a semester and be reminiscent of it for a lifetime like Stoner did?
>>24951006> should a man of intelligence pursue women?There's no "should", just do whatever the hell you want and think is best.Personally, I tried it once, it was too much work and too much drama, I got dumped, sobbed about it for a year, then accepted it and have been going it alone since (about 6 years now). So far it's been OK.
>>24951131Doing "whatever the hell you want" leads to unfortunate situations, like what happened to you, me, Stoner or any other fool that trusted "love" whole heartily. Quote from the book: >... the person one loves at first is not the person one loves at last, and that love is not an end but a process through which one person attempts to know anotherI interpret the quote that people change and you should too. But the thing is, shouldn't we try to aim for love that will not hurt us later on in life?
>>24951006As far as I’m concerned, all marriage is “gay” marriage.
>>24951189Yes, it is theatrical act. But the question was more about relationships with women overall.
>>24951180> leads to unfortunate situationsIt's not true of every pair (ignoring the polygamists for the sake of simplicity) of people. Some will genuinely go on to love each other until death and ultimately be happier together than they would have been separate, and continue to change in ways that are compatible with each other throughout life. Some will end up like me, you, or Stoner.The point is, none of this is certain. Life is ultimately the stock market - you invest time, mental and physical resources, and sometimes also money in various pursuits, and some of them have positive payoff in terms of utility, some zero, and some negative (you've gained nothing and it's ultimately made you less happy). This includes anything from a career, to participating in a political movement, to pursuring a relationship with a particular person.How much return you expect from any bet going either way, and how likely you expect any of these contingencies to be are estimations you will make yourself, these are ultimately subjective - no one has a crystal ball. Your risk appetite - outcomes with what utility at what probabilities you want to pursue - are also subjective. That's what I mean by "do whatever the hell you want". I personally expect the chances that I'll find a person I'll be happy with low, the unhappiness I will incur from finding the wrong person is high, and have a low risk tolerance, so I stay the hell out. But these are choices I've made for myself, not a universal prescription.
Any good books on Prime Ministers of Canada?
>>24950479they're all sex pests every last one of them so don't even bother lad
>>24950510Even Jean Chrétien?
>>24950479Doubt it but pic related is a great movie
2025 is almost over. What's the best book you read this year?
>>24947281Post Captain, #2 in O'Brien's Aubrey-Maturin series. I went into it as a Seaman interested in nautical tales but honestly it's such a good book on its own merits in the humour and representation of Napoleonic era society and seafaring. Much less gay than Moby dick, which is a worth a lot.
>>24949328Could be more psychological, but the books relies too much on humour that may be funny only on boomer standards. Rare case where the movie is actually better than the book.
>>24947281Best one so far is Stoner of Great Gatsby, though can't remember if I read Steppenwolf actually this year, and that might be the best one if so.>>24947341Currently reading this but will not finish before next year. But great book. Really captivating style of writing.
Probably...either Childhood's End by Arthur C. Clarke or UBIK by Philip K. Dick.
Florida Palms by Joe Pan
Ἁλικαρνασσόθεν edition>τὸ πρότερον νῆμα·>>24877858>Μέγα τὸ Ἑλληνιστί/Ῥωμαϊστί·https://mega dot nz/folder/FHdXFZ4A#mWgaKv4SeG-2Rx7iMZ6EKw>Mέγα τὸ ANE·https://mega dot nz/folder/YfsmFRxA#pz58Q6aTDkwn9Ot6G68NRg>Work in progress FAQhttps://rentry dot co/n8nrkoAll Classical languages are welcome.
using "Gradus Primus" by Paulo Rónaiand I must say: what a gem! since I have used Familia Romana pars I before, this has been a bit too easy, but I think they are equally good. With the advantage that Gradus Primus brings short but absolutely precise explanations in portuguese. It was only 30 BRL ! (5 USD)
>>24950523>Orberg was not the first to do margin notes, look at these other books by the same publisherDude google “nature method institute” right now. I’m familiar with Arthur Jensen’s work.>this is youNo. Totally different person. I came here spur of the moment assuming I wouldn’t get any French at all so it’s been a pleasant surprise.>>24950627It’s a website with a bunch of easy texts that gets posted here a lot>Looks great to meyou have discovered what I think scholars call “an opinion”>>24950633Thanks
>>24951059Looks great. Thanks for sharing. It can be read with google translate. The translation doesn't seem perfect but if you look at both the original and the translation even without knowing Portuguese you can sometimes guess what's going on. For example it translated "menina" to "little girl" which is confusing but when you see that it's one word in Portuguese it makes more sense.https://archive.org/details/paulo-roacutenai-curso-basico-de-latim-gradus-primusIt looks a little similar to these:https://archive.org/details/latinfortodayfir0000grayhttps://archive.org/details/Latin_method_Most_1stYearOxford Latin CourseCambridge Latin Coursebut maybe simpler and more succinct, which I like, so it's maybe better in my opinion.I like reading language textbooks in other languages, because you learn two languages at once. Here's one in German for Latin:https://libgen.li/edition.php?id=136898262
>>24951175>Dude google “nature method institute” right now. I’m familiar with Arthur Jensen’s work.I wasn't talking to you only, but to anyone reading the thread. Many people here think Orberg's books are one of a kind, when in fact there are almost identical books for other languages which came decades earlier, and the method overall is from the 19th century.>It’s a website with a bunch of easy texts that gets posted here a lotYeah I found it, but you said "side reader" which seemed to imply any of the multiple books in the Lingua Latina series which complement the main books.>you have discovered what I think scholars call “an opinion”There is a difference between a proposition and an argument. An opinion can be backed up with anything at all, or it can be just a statement/proposition with nothing whatsoever backing it up. I asked in order to get anything whatsoever backing it up.>ThanksThat link was bad. This is better, but not great either, there might be a higher quality download somewhere:https://annas-archive.org/md5/85af4a5d243cf0bab2be900c872b29e1
>>24951244>There is a difference between a proposition and an argument. An opinion can be backed up with anything at all, or it can be just a statement/proposition with nothing whatsoever backing it up. I asked in order to get anything whatsoever backing it up.none of this needed explanation retard
>If there is a danger, it lies in the Negro music and dancing that has been imported into Europe. This music has completely won over a whole section of the cultured population of Europe, to the point of real fanaticism. It is inconceivable that the incessant repetition of the Negroes’ physical gestures as they dance around their fetishes or that the constant sound of the syncopated rhythm of jazz bands should have no ideological effects.Was unc spittin fax here?
>>24951243>beauty should be destroyed and trampled on by the ugly and the repulsiveKill yourself immediately.
>>24951245No, kill the beautiful instead. The horrifying ugly monsters must destroy the beautiful
>>24951229Thank you. But it sounds so lovely.
>>24950893>“Ora è impossibile immaginare che la ripetizione continuata dei gesti fisici che i negri fanno intorno ai loro feticci danzando, che l’avere sempre nelle orecchie il ritmo sincopato degli jazz-bands, rimangano senza risultati ideologici;>a) si tratta di un fenomeno enormemente diffuso, che tocca milioni e milioni di persone, specialmente giovani;>b) si tratta di impressioni molto energiche e violente, cioè che lasciano tracce profonde e durature;>c) si tratta di fenomeni musicali, cioè di manifestazioni che si esprimono nel linguaggio più universale oggi esistente, nellinguaggio che più rapidamente comunica immagini e impressioni totali di una civiltà non solo estranea alla nostra, ma certamente meno complessa di quella asiatica, primitiva ed elementare, cioè facilmente assimilabile e generalizzabile dalla musica e dalla danza a tutto il mondo psichico”Here's the direct quote, found it in Roberto Franchini's "Gramsci e il jazz"
>>24950751This is retarded. The inclusion of strong and persistent rhythm doesn’t eliminate the capacity for melody and longer forms. Listen to the Black Saint for an example
sansa 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: >>24922194
>>24950925Damn, zoomers really have no taste in women.
>>24950902
>>24950856Ygritte getting BLACKED by the black bastard of the wall.
>>24950870Luv Emilia!
WOW this thread is fucking shit
I regularly see threads on JP and Zizek but less commonly Jung and rarely Lacan.I have been reading Lacan on and off throughout the year and it has been pretty revelatory to me. If I were to try to take a stab at summarizing Lacan for anons that haven’t studied him, basically everything is fake and gay, anything not fake and gay is real, and >you are a subject beneath the fake and gay but not exactly a 1:1 product of the fake and gay. Your motif should be to recognize that to understand the real through anything fake and gay is impossible, therefore traverse the fake and gay knowing it’s fake and gay in accordance to your desire(TM). If anyone with more experience in Lacanian thought disagrees with my shit take, feel free to correct. Question: Why is Lacan not talked about as often as Freud and Jung are, or perhaps in general? Is his thought too subversive? Is it because he’s French? Pic related, worst mistake of my life
Well as the resident Jungfag on this board I speak about him because he has a lot to say. The depths of his insight are huge, and the implications of his discoveries are huge. Doing philosophy without knowing Jung is far more hamstringing than doing it without knowing Plato or Aristotle imo.The reason I haven't looked into Lacan is because his influence seems to solely be in being namedropped by French and French-adjacent academics. I've heard he builds on Freud, but Freud was already surpassed long ago and given the worthlessness of Sartre, Camus, de Beaviour, etc. who these academics also namedrop I don't see anything to attract me to Lacan.
>>24950626If you want to start with Lacan, I found the Cambridge Introduction to Lacan to be a great primer. I am better versed in Jungian thought than Lacanian, but I’ve found the Lacanian lens to be rather useful for me personally. Consider giving it a quick glance to see if it’s interesting to you.>>24950606Interestingly, Lacan would reject that there is a “meta” to be reached. Everything is symbols (which leads to the point you raised), quite interesting imo.
Lacan is the comp. lit. survival outpost for German Idealists who cant read German.
>>24950626I’ve heard bits from Jung that made sense to me, but never sat right. And I think I know why now: psychiatrists borrow the authority of the poet without the poet’s vocation (calling).
>>24950725Iirc is was X where he goes through anxiety. You're right in the sense this is all made up, it's literally whatever you've created to convince yourself you need a sexual partner. No matter how many paradoxes you work through you eventually hit objet. Everyone has this though, theoretically pre-Lacanian ideas can still apply. Big O is usually why he ends up being popular with all of those other thinkers. Big O is the imaginary symbolic order or hypothetical authority that still excludes jouissance of other. Lacan couldn't create it without borrowing from a schematic that's Hegelian in some ways. So instead of a floating truth value system (Lacan rejects this) you get a sort of desirous paradox with floating values. This makes it popular to a wide variety of people. You can substitute a car in or frankly anything really and start using Big O. The catch is that whatever has been assigned doesn't have this applied value, you enter a register loop, objet is just objet you invented the values. At some point this is realized and whatever your left with is whatever your left with. There might still be a coherence loop, realization doesn't end the sequence arbitrarily, but the realization can't be reversed.
The end of the year is almost hereWhat are top 9 books you have read this year? You have read more than 9 books, right?
Please do not respond to the frog poster ever again.
Please do respond to the frog poster once again.
>>24951183A Farewell to ArmsLaurusThe Shadow of the TorturerFaustThe Sorrows of Young WertherWilhelm Meister's ApprenticeshipThe Great DivorceThat All Shall Be SavedMadame Bovary
1. An AdulteryTropic of CancerGerminalCannery RowPierre; or, The AmbiguitiesA Heart So WhiteMadame BovaryThe Star RoverThe Kingdom of this World
