To what extent do you think modern humans are beholden to natural evolution?By that I mean: natural selection is the process where genetic differences lead to certain individuals being more likely to reproduce, and thus pass on the specific genetic traits that made them more likely to do so, leading to organisms changing over many generations. But for modern humans, there are many factors beyond the purely genetic that determine whether someone reproduces or not, and these factors aren't (necessarily) inherited as genetics are, which would suggest "natural" evolution isn't at play anymore.Wealth, status, education, occupation, political or spiritual membership and community in general, personality; some of these you could potentially argue can be traced back to purely genetic differences, but many have nothing to do with the material makeup of the person being born, and even larger abstract factors like "the state of the nation's economy" or "the geopolitics of the continent" have an effect on if or when humans reproduce. At that point we are lightyears away from genetics mattering.Not to mention, if we assume that free will exists, someone who is in the position to could simply choose not to reproduce simply because they can. Is "natural selection" still at play there?And no, I'm not really interested in how you think your god(s) factor into this.
>>24713571Since women do most of the selecting, I'd say not much. Women select for low intelligence, which is why society is getting progressively dumber each generation. I do believe God exists but he's very very angry.
>>24717194>RationalistsAs opposed to Empricists, huh? I think memetics has some merit though.
>>24714661Lack of coitus. Freud had a point.
>>24717234Unfortunately I'm referring to the retarded personality cult around people like Eliezer Yudkowsky and Scott Alexander rather than the genuine philosophical movement.
>>24717240Oh I should have known. Carry on.But on the topic of mimesis and mimetics what literature is relevant?
Why didn't he kill himself?
>>24716394He could, but that would require more effort than you spoon feeding us a response.
>>24716376Because no philosopher in the existence, now or ever, actually lived what they preached. It was all whiners and schizos all along, a bunch of cucks the whole lot of them. Not even Stirner went all the way with his conclusions it seems.
>>24716471Truth exists independent of personality.
>>24716421that's crazy
>>24716394recession indicator or some shit like that
Any good books that refute Zizek's metaphysical system?
>>24716432a non retarded reading of hegel's logic and phenomenology
>>24716432How do people find targeted thorough refutations of any philosophical system?Some one can go>UNREFUTEDto any big name philosopher I can think of and its true because I am not really aware of much systematic works of refutation. Someone who would be interested in doing that would instead make their own system.
>>24716432Its piecemeal but I heard pilleater has done it
>>24716432Fashionable Nonsense though it doesn't refute zizek specifically.
>>24716432YesZizek's
What do we think of "La Comédie humaine"?As a social retard, I need to learn. I got no empathy but I'm too much of a retard to be a machiavellian dude
idk but balzac sounds like ballsack LMAO
>>24717131>La Comédie humaineI don't think there's one anon here that has read through all of it. Maybe that one Balzac anon.One has to applaud the author, truly one of the greats
>>24717226Of course nobody does, but I'm pretty sure lots of people in here read at least part of La Vie Parisienne.I enjoyed Illusions Perdues, as sad as it is.
>>24717230I have only finished Eugenie Grandet and Pere Goriot myself. Both works are greats in their own right, but I feel inclined to prefer the former. I specially like his reflective tone on changing social structures. It makes one think about how much this world has changed since the 18th-19th century bourgeoisie paradigm shift
have you ever invented a word? zoomers recently invented chalant
>>24717061It's based on nonchalant, not really new.
This man is the most successful millenial word inventor
Which way Western Man?
>>24716246It’s a forgivable misreading, this is exactly why Fichte abandoned the method of the three foundational principles, because it suggests this primitive is/ought dualism. But Hegel didn’t know the lectures and Fichte was too buttblasted by the atheism controversy to publish them. You could read the whole Nova Methodo lectures as a retroactive response to this. Tl;dr - being-for-one is the noumenal self in Nova Methodo, it is not in time, the infinite progress does not exist for it as such. We of course phenomenally experience infinite progress and Hegel does not dispute this.
>>24715237what you see is NOT what you get
>>24715137accurate and clairvoyant
>>24716151He is literally just seetheposting about getting admittedly filtered lmfao
>>24716232I don't mind having theoretical framework debates but just posting twitter screencaps of Nick Land's insults and Schopenhauer's insults doesn't really constitute buck breaking charlatans. If Land is still sticking with Leotard then he's still within Marxist bounds. If he's departed from Marx but still using it then he basically has to accept he doesn't have any idealistic merit and has to agree with Nietzsche or Schope and has fragged his own truth claims, he still might have a materialistic case but given all I see are insults my guess is he's just citing magic and gnosis. No offense to gnostics. So does he have some sort of proof beyond that he doesn't want to do dialectic and is welcome to believe whatever he wants?
how do you read the bible?do you just read it in order as if it were a novel? or there are better ways?
>>24716167Obviously I don't read the books in a day. I typically read about 1-3 chapters per day.
>>24711239You read it as a silly, alien, decadent Jewish byproduct.
>>24716831Sad he fell off in his later years
>>24711575They're not long at all. Some of them really do drag on and on about heritage or cubits but each individual book is shorter than most short-novels you've read
>>24711239The way I read it and they way I learned to love it was to read it alongside real archeological studies on the areas and anthropology in the bronze and iron age Canaan, Egypt and Midian. You'll then realized a lot of these stories are historical accounts simplified(and transformed into simple oral traditions. Figuring out these puzzles is the fun here to me.The bible is the ultimate unreliable-author book.
What is the opposite of being that is not just the negation of being?
Becoming.
Negation of the negation. /thread
>>24715937you will find it in the standard model
Gnieb
>>24715971this just precedes being, it is not the opposite
"Catzilla" editionPrevious: >>24698741/wg/ AUTHORS & FLASH FICTION: https://pastebin.com/ruwQj7xQRESOURCES & RECOMMENDATIONS: https://pastebin.com/nFxdiQvCPlease limit excerpts to one post.Give advice as much as you receive it to the best of your ability.Follow prompts made below and discuss written works for practice; contribute and you shall receive.If you have not performed a cursory proofread, do not expect to be treated kindly. Edit your work for spelling and grammar before posting.Violent shills, relentless shill-spammers, and grounds keeping prose, should be ignored and reported.(And maybe double-space your WIPs to allow edits if you want 'em.)Simple guides on writing:Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
I've ranged up and down these boards, but when I ask myself what is the most needless thread on 4chan, my mind always recurs to /wg/. There really is no point. All posters know it too. That's why it's so seldom used. There hangs about it the air of dead dreams. It becomes a perverse talisman to all the /lit/ posters who didn't quit their day job. Look at the distasteful silence that howls down these threads. It's only broken by the same two voices batting their word counts back and forth, as though any formless mass of writing is fit to print. Most writers sweat blood to reach 1000 publishable words. Your daily 1000, written to no purpose, would require a gift of unerring judgement to equal theirs. And, let's be honest, if you did possess such a gift, would 4chan be the first place you boast about it?
chatGPT polemics against the /wg/. an unexpected swerve for the board.
>>24715154maybe post the first page or something and not on google
>>24714949post moar
how is the start of my epilogue?
Books that embody the feeling of sniffing smelly women socks?
>>24717188I am going to find you and pull my cock out and slit a giant hole in your feet and fuck it and knock your feet up, nonny~ I am raping my goonstick just thinking about it~ I need nonny cock to splurt just from how fucking disgusting and depraved you are. I want you to bleed out and get ulcers and have them rupture in a cascade of pus and then force you to drink gasoline and jump on your stomach until you vomit it and light the vomit on fire whit a lighter so you burn from the outside in, nonny~
>>24717211Uhmm....
>>24717218*does this to you*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LjVwHnaW-s
>heidegger thought all this was shit because it doesn't "reveal the stone"
>>24716959read Coomaraswamy
>>24716959Even in beautiful art, the beauty is just one moment in the interaction between consciousness and matter that makes art the most important thing in the world.
>>24716876Heidegger hated western civilization.
>>24716949>>24716959Art isn't utilitarian.
>>24716889>The same year, Teresa Benedicta a Cruce and her biological sister Rosa, by then also a convert and an extern (tertiary of the order, who would handle the community's needs outside the monastery), were sent to the Carmelite monastery in Echt, Netherlands, for their safety. In response to the pastoral letter from the Dutch bishops on 26 July 1942, in which they made the treatment of the Jews by the Nazis a central theme, all baptized Catholics of Jewish origin (according to police reports, 244 people) were arrested by the Gestapo on the following Sunday, 2 August 1942. WTFFF???? /pol/ told me nazis only killed rich jewish people!!!!! wtf they did kill this woman for???
Did I get filtered or is this one weak?
>>24714869Based on this extremely specific criticism I take it the weird matriarchal orgies are historically accurate?
>>24714869>when someone from south Canaan shows up and preaches against the bull worship. He charges the bull with a knife and dies, which is hilarious. How can you be mad about that?
Is her Alexander trilogy good? I’ve been considering reading it because I’m on a historical fiction set in antiquity kick, but I’m worried it’ll just be purely about Alexander getting dicked down. I’m okay with a little gay shit, but I’m not interested in a full blown gay romance trilogy.
>>24716296Renault's men are poon hounds and hilariously chauvinistic, no worries
>>24716296>"Alexander trilogy">entire third book is an epilogue because he's deadAbsolute madlady
To Kill A Mockingbird should be banned from all public schools.
>>24713240Under the torture of the rack could you not draw that kind of confession out of me. What compels people to tell on themselves like this?
>>24713165And to mock rape victims, to say that white women want to be raped. This is a huge constant in the left. The only equivalent on the right is Ayn Rand.
>>24714341The true story that inspires the book: victim was white with a messed up arm and the people who killed him were black.
>>24714042By "Frank's murder" do you mean "the murder that Frank committed" or do you mean "the murder of Leo Frank"?
>>24713491Anyone who has actually read To Kill A Mockingbird will tell you that it's boring and bland. There's nothing there to criticize or provoke in it. There's barely any artfulness to it at all, same with Fahrenheit 451. The Outsiders has 50x more soul and art than both of those books combined and it's a young adult novel written by a teenage girl.
Who is your favorite writer who did not with the Nobel Prize for Literature?
>>24716720This. Pulitzer sure but Nobel peace prize? No way Jose.
>>24716998we're talking about the nobel prize for literature not peace.
>>24715190Shakespeare
Sartre
>>24715190Fun question. I think either James or Borges. Just noticed Joyce never won one, so Joyce. Suppose the really interesting modernists didn't start getting nobels until the 1940s Waiting out captcha: Nabokov didn't win either? I'll stick w/ Joyce. Actually teaching Portrait in an undergrad seminar later this semester and really looking forward to it
Does anyone else find the works of the Gawain/Pearl poet to be deeply moving? I'm not a Christian but his characters feel very realistic and heartfelt.
I've read Tolkien's translations of those poems plus Sir Orfeo. Pearl is a legitimately beautiful poem, especially once you think about its conceit: a daughter who died as an infant returning to comfort her father by showing him a vision of Heaven, where she is.Not to mention the poetic description of the heavenly Jerusalem is incredible.
>>24714975>>24714998I personally found the prose to be excessive for my taste. I also think I read the Tolkien translation.IMO I much prefer the older french romances of the likes if Chretian de Troyes from the 1100's. Stuff like Yvain and Lancelot. They are more terse but still lively, it struck a more enjoyable balance between plain speak and high words i believe. But to be fair they are not directly comparable, Gawain is much more of a poem while Chretien's work is more of a narrative.
I like sir gawain a lot, haven't read the other works. Have you seen the green knight movie? I find it very interesting
