Why yes, half page descriptions of lamps and countertops with the occasional interjection of brain dead criminals speaking futuristic ebonics. It certainly deserves all the praise. Were people really that bored in the 80s to enjoy this?I'm not finishing it. I feel my neurons dying in real time. I was right for putting it off for so many years.
>>24946610Neuromancer doesn't really hold up, mostly because what came out after took what he did and did it better. His prose is very jilted from what I remember. That being said the book is important because it invented a genre/subgenre. It's still a good novel, but if you have read other cyberpunk you probably find it formulaic without realizing that it created the formula.
Gibson has great imagery actually. Some of the best
>>24947771The prose is like the main thing I here praised about it these days since by this point every other cyberpunk story ever made took the ideas and story and characters and ran them into the ground
>>24947918>I here praised
>>24947621I simply don't care for descriptions of mundane objects. It's a waste of time. You dense cunt.
This is Dostoevsky's best novel.
>>24948418Cool, OP. Now explain why.
>>24948426The novel marks a turning point for the author. In it, he explores and critiques the class-based society of the time for the first time. It is also emotionally and psychologically profound. It has few characters, but all of them are unforgettable.
>>24948445gpt tier analysis
>>24948445Cool, OP. Now explain in detail.
Overrated or deserving of praise?
>>24948938Mid writer, GOAT person. His only works worth reading are the reviews where he shits on other people. He even reviewed video games.
>>24949021
More of an "industry figure" than a writer. Like a scifi Gertrude Stein. (Or less politely, a rider of coattails) Some of his stories are okay, but they aren't the reason he's a household name in the scifi world.
>>24948849An unsurpassed greedy kike goblin. Incel, snob, elitist, sexist, racist, plagiarist, sellout, rapist, pedophile and nepotist. Absolute unit of /ourguy/, definitely underrated.
>>24949108>racist, plagiarist, sellout, rapist, pedophile and nepotist.I’d heard about the rest but when was he accused of this stuff? I know he groped that woman on stage but i’d never heard him be accused of pedophilia
Everything else just seems so spooked and retarded. Like these "philosophers" can't even see past their own circumstances or analyze their own thoughts and motivations, only (poorly) justify their own particular neuroses. Has there ever been a half decent attempt at addressing, let alone refuting him?
>>24947750So, Taoism?
>>24948041>ignoring the reality of the world and power...Stirner didn't ignored nor denied it, he actually recognized it by what it is instead of justifying it with some bullshit pretext like law, politics or god.He pierced through the bullshit like no other philosopher.Other philosophers would have written a super mambo jambo salad of words just to not say "real power is whoever wields it". And that applies to property ownership too.His writing style is shitty and chaotic though, but that doesn't diminishes the lucidity and accuracy of (some) of his ideas.Spooks everywhere, you too got spook'd.>>24947773You too, spook. Your ego is a spook.
>>24947731You dont enjoy philosophy, you live it.
>what if… YOU are the spookyou didn’t read the fucking book
>>24947731Stirner was right, so yeah he remains unbreakable. I think although he did say a lot good things along the lines of "live for yourself" "think for yourself" "seek happiness" "don't bow to ideas they do not really exist or own you; you have made them" it isn't clear to me, or I think he didn't spend enough time on how to approach Justice and Aesthetics. There are atleast 100 sentences that boils down to "Christianity is a spook", I wish he had cut these parts to go a bit wider in scope. On Justice there is [pic related] that I find enlightening. Since as an egoist everything is "good" or "bad" in relation to oneself (the criminal is bad towards himself), I think there are a lot of insights to have on justice regarding why is it bad to steal/kill/exploit/lie to other strong humans specifically, in most circumstances, and not other animals? (part of my answer : because humans cannot be made to serve, because focusing on stealing prevents you from prioritizing your own creative strength, because promoting servitude of others towards you means you have to hold some dumb beliefs and be constantly dishonest that you are also acting out of servitude; basically it takes so much efforts to try to hold the reins of power that it chips away your individuality; other animals are easy peasy to conquer) Other questions : As an egoist, do I even want to put people in Jail? As an egoist, do I want capital punishment? On aesthetics and how to reach happiness I think those 2 quotes encapsulates things best :"Reserved for the future are the words, 'I am owner of the world of things, and I am owner of the world of mind'.” -- Stirner, The Ego and Its Own “As we there had to say, 'we are indeed to have appetites, but the appetites are not to have us', so we should now say, 'we are indeed to have mind, but mind is not to have us'.” -- Stirner, The Ego and Its OwnComment too long. Click here to view the full text.
What’s the male version of this? I’m tired as fuck
>>24946644>incels want high quality women that they can't get>femcels want commitment from high quality men they can get Both are low quality but want high quality. They would NEVER settle for each other.
>>24946838her previous novel, eileen, is about a femcel i.e. a smelly ugly weird antisocial girl and somehow that got attached to this one for some reason even as you say it makes no fucking sensebut then again incel is used for any misogynistic guy these days regardless of their sex-having status so i guess maybe it counts as the equivalentthe word they're really reaching for is "misanthrope"
>>24944422This, lol.
im reading this book this month so far it's ok very light read
>ctrl+f oblomov>1 resultthis thread should have been over in 5 repliesthis board fucking sucks
2025 is almost over. What's the best book you read this year?
>>24947281Candide
>>24947281SuttreeThe Tunnel (the Argentine one)The Glamour by Christopher PriestAnd the Second Apocalypse fantasy series which is 7 booksHonourable mention to Interlibrary Loan by Gene Wolfe, and Hard to be a God by the Strugatskys.As far as nonfiction, I haven't finished these books but Laocoon and Wagner's On Music and Drama.
I really liked pic related.
>>24948804Whn Huck Finn and Douglas widow whether it was Tom Sawyer that found the booze in the hotel.
>>24949049*When he asked
What's your reading plans for 2026?Suggest a book to read in 2026 collectively. I'll add dubs (Jan to Sep, 11 to 99) and trips (Oct to Dec, 111 to 333) to the chart.
Against the Day --- Thomas Pynchon
>>24948587This year I am going to read poetry and related nonfiction as heavily as I typically read fiction, because I intend to get serious and write poetry. I'm done jerking off.
>waiting for trips on one of 4chan's slowest boardsAnyway, I vote for Crocosmia by Miranda Ellis. I'll be reading it anyway on a friend's recommendation but it's apparently very good.
>>24949085ironically enough, we had three double sevens so far. rollin' for Portnoy's Complaint.
>>24948587i plan on finishing erikson's malazan books by feb, hopefullyafter that, don't know yet
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.
>>24949004Enjoying these postscaptcha: SAYDO
>>24949070>You're mocking an opinion no one holds, i.e., a strawmanI just debated a bunch of Orthobros who all had those opinions. So you're wrong there too. Sorry if you feel embarrassed by them. You otherwise seemed more thoughtful and honest.
>>24949004>Under no circumstances does Aristotle ascribe any kind of creativity to the active intellect,accessibility* instead of creativity. the active intellect obviously creates. but the chapters immediately preceding DA III.5 on knowledge refer to the mind receiving forms and thus obtaining knowledge, in direct contrast to the creativity of the active intellect. and even then, the creativity that the active intellect has is that of the technique that the craftsman has. this is formal and final cause. the text juxtaposes the art versus matter in the analogy (the matter being what becomes all things, aka hylomorphic minds), and efficient cause is completely neglected altogether. that's the point I wanted to make. my bad for the confusion.
>>24949050This:>You're engaged in the equivalent of some modern assuming that when they see "soul" in an English translation of Aristotle it means some sort of sui generis Cartesian thinking substance, and then accusing Aristotle of believing in magic homunculi that pilot the body because he used the term soul and then calls it "immaterial."Really wasn't that hard to parse. He is saying you are misunderstanding the terminology in the passage you quoted in the same way the people often misunderstand Aristotle by projecting a Cartesian/modern understanding of the terms "soul" and "immaterial." That isn't accusing you of taking up a Cartesian position. It is just pointing out that you are misunderstanding the distinction in the passage you are quoting, as pointed out here: >>24948855I can provide another example. It is like reading a passage from Aquinas where he mentions the "form of the whole/part" and assuming he is talking about the idea that substantial forms/essences exist for parts of things. But that isn't what the distinction means (although last time I tested it ChatGPT spit out something like that). So too, you don't seem to understand the distinction of life according to essence and life according to activity, which goes back to the Synod of Ancyra and earlier.
>>24949004>So it is, in a sense, virtually a chair.And I believe he says so for the other senses too, but the problem unique to the soul here is that what is now virtually a chair is, apparently, me. Which problem does not arise for, e.g., sight, because he isn't saying that I actually become red when I see red. But then if the faculty of thought is identified with me, or rather my soul, then, actually I do become red when I think of red, something like that
Seriously what happened to this "Mature but crazy enough" archetype, Like are there any other writers or artists who look like Artaud's physiognomy
are there any biographical books about chronically depressed historical figures that went on to accomplish anything?
>>24947901Chateaubriand was very melancholic and mentions his failed suicide attempt in his memoirs
>>24948622If you can read spanish i highly recommend:https://repositorio.unal.edu.co/items/02de698a-248f-4aa6-a5ed-3a6c331e74c5https://repositorio.unal.edu.co/items/fe547f22-e20e-456e-bd28-cc79345934e0
>>24947901Uhhh maybe something about Kurt Cobain?
>>24947901Not about historical figures but maybe you should read>Ferdinand von Schirach
>>24947935Mass murder is actually good
>another mid whore catapulted into fame and fortune for existing That's it. This has gone too far, the woman problem HAS to be addressed now. Simping is an epidemic that is destroying society and it's only going to get worse.
>>24948238So do I. What of it, homo?
>>24948217Actually pretty good. Glad I read it.
>>24948297>inverted triangle bodnope
>>24947980Who?
>>24949026U gay or something?
>take the time to learn sanskrit up to a smooth dictionary-reading level>it's all live-laugh-love-tier inspirational quotes, smut, and astrology>thousands of years of this with no improvement whatsoeverWhat gives? I am racist now.
>>24948921The Vedics chose to live among their slaves
>>24948977>>24948973>>24948968Look at that linework. Maybe you can't see it, but only one guided by Grace could possibly produce such strokes.
>>24948986Go on read it
>>24948921>>it's all live-laugh-love-tier inspirational quotes, smut, and astrologyOnce you his Max level you stop levelling.
>>24948921> >it's all live-laugh-love-tier inspirational quotes, smut, and astrologyIndian philosophy is often written in long prose monographs that can be just as dense and demanding of one’s close attention as much as any western philosophical text. And Indian dramas are great as well. Sounds like you either just barely scratched the surface of Sanskrit literature or you are just trolling.
Redpill me on Dr. William Pierce. Are his works worth reading?
>>24948058>he tried to make a White Man's Religionbecause he was a midwit boomer faggot with a physics degree and how hard can it be to be the second coming of Jesus Christ anyway
>>24948058>It's gonna be hard for white people to ever feel like an ethnic community if they never get their real polytheistic traditions back.white nations existed, had cross flags, did great things, then betrayed the King and withered
>>24948069pierces self insert character has seggz with a slut whomst'd've somehow joined a terrorist org. this contradicts what was known to george orwell about female nature, but pierce is a faggot so he doesnt know that. naturally, pierces self insert character of the slut use contraceptives. contraception had been illegal shortly prior to this obscenity being published, and while young men today dont know that, pierce surely did. pierces vision for the future was EXACTLY WHAT WE HAVE NOW BUT WITH LESS BROWN PEOPLE
>>24941203daily reminder that Jesus Christ is the Savior of all white nations and the true greeks and scots are proud to have been His first converts
>>24945217hey mahometan does erhabi have a word for a man doing sex acts with a fertile woman that are intented not to result in pregnancy? like not the woman preventing pregnancy but the man helping her to prevent pregnancy but also sort of pretending to try to get her pregnant at the same time
>The Enlightenment was... le BAD?
>>24948343>>Germans are le bad and we must do everything to stop them from le doing things ever againBased and 100% true
The chapter on D&E in Nihil Unbound filtered me. How does reason emerge from primitive god worship? What is the difference between mimesis and mimicry. Adornobros help me out. >In the speculative anthropology proposed by Adorno and Horkheimer, instrumental rea- son is the extension of tool-use and hence a function of adaptational constraints. The emergence of instrumental rationality is inseparable from the primordial confrontation between dominating and dominated powers which primitive humanity experienced in its powerlessness before all-powerful nature. Sacrifice is the attempt to effect a commensuration between these incommensurables – between the omnipotence of nature and the impotence of primitive humanity. Yet from the outset sacrificial magic presupposed the logic of mimesis: ‘At the magical stage dream and image were not regarded as mere signs of things but were linked to them by resemblance or name. The relationship was not one of inten- tion but of kinship. Magic like science is concerned with ends but it pur- sues them through mimesis, not through an increasing distance from the object’ (Adorno and Horkheimer 2002: 7). Mimesis establishes the equivalence between dissimilars which provides the precondition for sacrifice. It provides a non-conceptual commensuration of particularity with generality, thereby allowing one to serve as a substitute for the other"
>>24948261>so yeah we should assume the universe revolves around the earth and bring back slavery because its heckin based and stuff!
>>24949061French-Jewish hands typed this
>millions must achieve freudo-marxist gnosis
>Moby-Dick;
>or, The Whale
>The Anatomy of Melancholy:) >What it is: With all the Kinds, Causes, Symptomes, Prognostickes, and Several Cures of it. In Three Maine Partitions with their several Sections, Members, and Subsections. Philosophically, Medicinally, Historically, Opened and Cut Up:D
