Recommended reading charts. (Look here before asking for vague recs)https://mega.nz/folder/kj5hWI6J#0cyw0-ZdvZKOJW3fPI6RfQ/folder/4rAmSZxb>Archive:https://warosu.org/lit/?task=search2&search_subject=sffg>Goodreads:https://www.goodreads.com/group/show/1029811-sffg>Previous:>>24729043>Thread Question:Do you need supplementary material to enjoy books? I'm talking art, music, etc. based on the property? Does it help you visualize what you've read better?
>>24749424I know nothing about the books.I just finished something so i'm not currently reading anything, but neither am i motivated to start something else, even though i could use the distraction.Stop projecting your fetishes.
>>24745507These threads have some of the most autistic people on this board and that's saying something.
>>24748749Shallan is, unfortunately, the main character of book 2. It's hard to know when her PoV will suddenly matter.
>>24740187Haven't read earthsea but I have read Heavens Lathe and loved it so probably earthsea
Is there a reason P. Watts has gotten so popular in the past 3 years? Or just a build-up of a consistent fan base creating content like that short film and online reviews?
With the Church now positioned against AI, what philosophers or prominent ideologies, besides accelerationists and techno optimists, remain on the side of AI?
>>24749820Of course LLMs have a bias, they're trained on material that also has a bias, because all material does when taken in large quantities.
>>24749843The biggest reason for the "bias" is that it strongly corresponds to the "most likely answer" given the data, and so the origin of the bias is of course the data.But there's a lot more to it.For one this bias is and will continue to influence LLM users to use more process-relational language in their thinking.You're going to hear phrases like the "tapestry of existence" a lot more.
>>24749300>get behind, satan!What does that mean?
>>24749808You're denying the Trinity by denying that they are different persons.
>>24748940I hate christianity, but I am with the pope on this one.
>His Principia Mathematica side hustle imploded. Gödel the God-fearing Christian ruined it.>He had epistemological trolls that any atheist Reddit neckbeard could have come up with and that were less sophisticated than those of Sextus Empiricus and Hume.>His theory of descriptions was completely unnecessary, a midwit answer to something only midwits see as a problem ("[Meinong] argued, if you say that the golden mountain does not exist, it is obvious that there is something that you are saying does not exist -- namely the golden mountain; therefore the golden mountain must subsist in some shadowy Platonic world of being, for otherwise your statement that the golden mountain does not exist would have no meaning. I confess that, until I hit upon the theory of descriptions, this argument seemed to me convincing.")>Even his stupid paradox in naive set theory that bears his name had been prefigured elsewhere in letters from Zermelo.>Continental scholars routinely demonstrated his misunderstandings of Continental philosophers, toward whom he had emotional, Anglocuck revulsions unbecoming of a thinker.
>>24749387It's when a dog gives birth to a cat, right?
>>24734677Daily /pol/ christfag thread
>>24749540hey mr retard here's the xenoparity you wantedhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messor_ibericus#Xenoparity
>>24749387>>24748063>Macroevolution comprises the evolutionary processes and patterns which occur at and above the species level. In contrast, microevolution is evolution occurring within the population(s) of a single species. In other words, microevolution is the scale of evolution that is limited to intraspecific (within-species) variation, while macroevolution extends to interspecific (between-species) variation.Even wikipedia refutes you. Stop posting anon, it's embarrassing
I don't get it, why not just call in the monks at Mr Athos to do a tinsey miracle to shut up the atheists
What are some books that explain this problem.
I’m not qualified to speak on this topic, but as typical midwit I feel compelled to give my unsolicited opinion anyways.It feel like lot of the people who complain about capitalism are complaining about things common to capitalism instead of things inherent to it. Like, common people who complain aren't upset about the fact that the ceo of the company they work for makes a quadrillion more dollars than them, they're upset about the fact that the fraction they DO get doesn't cover what they need: their bills, their healthcare, their groceries, etc. I just don't get why we have to dismantle the system when there are an unlimited number of ways to solve this problem under a capitalist system. Healthcare is literally free in most of the world today. Food stamps have been a thing for a while and can be expanded. If we were to have free basic government housing alongside luxury private housing the system isn't now suddenly communist. The owners of the means of production haven't changed. I'd even argue that in certain societies, capitalism can be a force for good socially as well. If we consider the scenario that Company A is under a capitalist system and Company B isn’t, and they both have a boss that fucking despises (insert x group here), boss of B has no incentive to hire someone from that group and can stack the workforce with people who share his hate. Even if the government were to implement a program, those workers have no power since the means of production are democratically owned and the majority of the workers hate them. In the case of A however, at least in modern day, the want for capital is directly in conflict with the bosses' ability to discriminate. I'm sure there are companies where the owner wants to yell I hate niggers from the rooftop, but he cares more about money than anything else, so he shuts the fuck up and collects his checks.Capitalism imo is a system of contradiction. Everyone is trying to squeeze out every dollar that they can get their hands on, yet the only way to do that is to take it from other people trying to do the same. The shit stimulates an economy like a motherfucker, but it can very quickly get out of hand and cause poverty/inequality/corruption/etc. It needs a guiding hand to rein it in at times and apply guardrails, but is that not literally what the government exists to do? Historically they haven’t been great at it, but that's passing the buck away and blaming the system for the faults of shitty leaders, which is what people have unfairly been doing to socialism and communism for hundreds of years. People are always gonna try to be slippery and cheat the system but, like every other system ever, this is why adaptive governance is needed.I'm bored on my work break so if someone could explain why I'm wrong I'd love to read it, I’m not attached to capitalism or dying on the front lines to defend it. It just seems to me like people are throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Modern science proves the universe is a community of co-creators, not a machine, construct, or hierarchical scheme.The history of the universe demonstrates profound creativity, having continually realized new forms and relationships that were previously impossible.The emergence of life was such a horizon.The universe is a never-ending ever-transforming work of art created by all its constituents.A society that doesn't reflect this fact in its foundations reflects only lies that are destined to unravel.
>>24749760The Bolsheviks made mistakes but suppressing the kulaks was not one of them, they were a serious counter-revolutionary element that needed to be dealt with ruthlessly.
>>24749913>doubling downI rest my case.>Kill the farmers because they aren't on board with the gay revolution.>The famine isn't our fault!
>>24749262The "No True Scotsman" applies because you exclude any unpleasant reality from your definition of capitalism. If the core profit motive systematically leads actors to break the rules, those are systemic failures, not random external bugs. The Bhopal disaster wasn't a 2nd-order effect. It was the direct, first-order result of a business decision to cut safety costs to maximize profit. The chemical leak was the direct physical outcome of that financial choice. So yes "no true scotsman" does apply.>>24749285Fair critique, let me try and be more specific in my explanation.Let's take Chiquita Bananas as an example. When locals threaten the ROI, the private, profit-maximizing entity uses capital to purchase violence (paramilitaries) to enforce absolute control over its assets and wage costs. This is a calculated economic tool to solve a business problem. It is ROI-driven violence to suppress the cost of labor. This mechanism is unique to a system where private capital has the power and incentive to outsource political terror. The system reinforces bad behavior.>>24749330First of Marx had no control in how others interpreted or used his work. Marx is still relevant as you yourself note here:>Yes, pure capitalism and profit motive can come into conflict with the value of human life. This is a known flaw and problems can be solved with targeted fixes through regulations and culture.>If you had just ditched Marxism in the first place and not even wasted time with that bullshit, everyone would be much better off.I agree which is why I lean toward the libertarian socialist/social anarchist schools of thought. As they accurately critiqued the Marxists before they got off the ground.So generally I agree with your overall sentiment I'm just not sure you understand how quick these guardrails can fail because of the lack of democratic processes in a capitalistic world. We are slaves to the market it doesn't work for us.
Can someone point me to an amoral character? I don't think amorality actually exists. It seems like you're either doing good or doing evil.
>>24749880
>>24749935Is power a value? Seems like a means and not an end. Interesting point>>24749940He's stuck though.>>24749952>He is definitely amoral, but most people would consider his actions (e.g. baiting another man into a duel so he can kill him because he was bored) as evil.He's just evil and somewhat retarded>>24749971I thought he was good but desu cannot remember the plotlines
>>24749978>I thought he was goodHe kills people for money regardless if they're good or bad. Fortunately most of the people he's hired to take out are scum so the games don't become grimdark.
>>24749891Not my problem
Absolutely not. The lectures are good and you should read also inaugural diss. The rest in that picture are useful only if you are already interested in them
>>24750002Just read critique bro
>>24750002I think the number of introductory reading charts that exist out there that people agree on is rare.
My "to read" stack is getting suspiciously larger while my "read" stack has been the same for weeks, if not for months.How do you grapple with this conundrum?
Stop adding books to your "to read" stack
ITT: Books only you have read
>>24749557Could it have been this?
>>24749541who is that cute boy?
>>24749541Lowry, including Ultramarine, is read by a great many.
this is not a joke
You know, I've been thinking. The Judge isn't always exactly consistent in his demeanor or opinions. For example, one time he says that man can theoretically discover the secrets of the world but at another time (during nighttime, the coin monologue) he goes on to tacitly deny cosmic uniformity. Then I'm thinking, he's sometimes described as an oversized infant and he does not seem to age, and every night he seems to just wander about naked as the day he was born. So now I'm thinking that during those scenes, like the time we see him circling the caldera reciting epic poetry, he might be in some process of redefining himself or experimenting, like the ubermensch figure that he is. In a sense, being reborn. Maybe that's deliberate symbolism, maybe not.
>>24749694>It is the way it was and will be. This way, and not some other way. The book is memed to hell and back, this thread is proof of that. But that phrase in of itself genuinely freaked me out. I know people take him to be satan sitting on earth, or a manifestation of war in the mortal realm or something similar. But considering Judge Holden was based on a guy in My Confession by Samuel Chamberlain, I look at it more that he was just a man obsessed with warfare, domination and ownership over everything as a result of being educated. Self educated or schooled or took up reading as a hobby and got too obsessed. I've seen a few people I know learn history beyond WW2 as history buffs and just turn into complete "history is all war and times preparing for war" types that end up nihilistic after reading too much and not doing anything but thinking themselves to death with a half baked Nietzsche-esqe view. Something that I've only noticed in Americans specifically but I don't have a large sample size so I can't say for sure. And I don't think it has to do with the politics of the person themselves since the three examples I have vary wildly.
>>24749881>The Judge is just whatifalthist born in 1825
>>24749857*is inconsistent
>>24749852Ok. And what do they symbolize?
>>24749881I think you are right. In fact I fully believe that "Blood Meridian" is a Christian rant against a pantheist war-obsessed intellectual who preaches Nietzschean amorality ("moral law is the invention of the weak against the strong") and mastery over the Earth.But ironically, just like the Devil, the Judge is condemned to suffer from the emptiness and wickedness of his quest and the inability of his will to fully command other men, illustrated by his utter failure to corrupt the Kid to his cause. (He is practically seething at the Kid not selling his guns to him and at its minor acts of mercy).I dislike all of this and believe it insists upon itself as >>24749816 noted, but it must be granted to McCarthy that:>He wrote it in such an obscure way that the majority of readers are hopelessly filtered, possibly including me if my interpretation is incorrect.>He did not fall into the temptation of making "good win in the end", at least in the physical world. In the final chapter the Judge is exposed as spiritually pathetic and condemned, but he is still the ruler of this world.
Umm why isn't he talking about Trump? Where is the Trump stand-in? I'm so confused..
>>24748976Before he dies he needs to post a boomer selfie of himself, somehow somewhere, maybe on telephone poles
>>24748976Anon. When you're as old as that, you should have figured out by then that all politicians are pieces of shit and not worth a single word. I'm half his age and know this.
>>24748976Could he do it well, do you think? Is there anyone who could?
Has anyone else noticed this trend of people wanting to get rid of entire tropes, concepts, themes, etc in storytelling purely because a popular media did it poorly at one point? I swear I've seen this so many times.>Grey morality >Humans are the real monsters >Characters dealing with their trauma and having emotional conversations >Critiques of capitalism, consumerism, broader society etc. Instead of wanting these tropes to be written better, people just want to throw them out wholesale purely because they were done poorly by something popular. They want to throw the entire orchard away because of a few bad apples and I think that's utterly retarded. I don't know if it's because of the quality of discussion online slowly going down over the years or what. People talk about how bad modern writers are, but I can't imagine what kind of saccharine sterile shit these kinds of people would produce if they were in charge.
>I am rendered incredulous, and still wish that Shakespeare had not perpetrated this poetic atrocity. Except for the hilarious Aaron the Moor, Titus Andronicus is ghastly bad if you take it straightFinally, someone who says what everyone else is thinking
Fat fucking idiot
>>24749984He's right. Play kinda sucks.
>>24749984Well it‘s one of his pre-Richard II plays. They were all bad and this one unexceptionally so. It‘s funny the particular care Bloom regards in seeing the mulatto baby saved in a play filled to the brim with gore though. His sacred idol.
Opinions?
>>24745882>Opinions?They're like assholes. Everyone has them, and they all spew shit.
>>24745882I use his Thoth tarot deck
>>24745882Humorless fart sniffer and intentionally obtuse perennialism dressed up for mystical esoteric order larping >>24746149I read diary of a drug fiend and moonchild, imagine fear and Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas but it's completely humorless and self serious. Again, fart sniffing.
>>24745882Interesting guy. I mostly think of him as a historical curiosity. Would have been fun to party with. One of my wife's friends is supposedly his great granddaughter. The opinion in her family is that he's a huge piece of shit.
Quite literally just a pedo using muh magik to get away with it
General philosophy thread for amicable discussion. Starting questions for anons:1.) How did you get into philosophy?2.) What value do you see in philosophy?3.) Who is your favorite philosopher and why?4.) What philosophers do you look forward to studying and why?5.) What advice do you have for the zoomers who are just starting to read philosophy?
>>24749542>1.) How did you get into philosophy?I don't know, I just get fixated on things. I don't really control it per se. >2.) What value do you see in philosophy?It's just interesting. >3.) Who is your favorite philosopher and why?I've only read a few so i wouldn't say I have a favorite necessarily because I don't think I have enough exposure or depth within the category to really know that yet. Instead, I'll say someone I've read and why I like them. >Julius EvolaI like his romantic view of life and how it intertwines with the ancients >Miguel Serrano Similar to Evola but a sharp distinction of extension into how far he pushes the metaphysical structure >Nick Land Interesting and thought provoking ideas.>Immanuel Kant I like that he creates a very systematized structure with regards to thinking and then draws a very hard line before metaphysics as to not go beyond what is knowable. Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>24749628>all philosophy is autistic and densely arguedIn fairness, some isn't -- Nietzsche isn't like this, to use an easy example. >analytic idealismthere's plenty of idealist analytics out there, but I get the sense that you're more reading idealist continentials (hegel etc?) so I get what you're saying. I find the Cambridge Companion / Oxford Companion series invaluable for studying specific philosophers, both companions to Spinoza are worth their weight in gold. They probably have one for whoever you're reading atm>ethics, part 1 and 2man those are the hardest parts! the best stuff is books 4 and 5, which are genuinely beautiful and astonishingly moving. at least to me. Spinoza's an interesting figure in that most philosophers disagree with him but acknowledge that he's a fascinating, deep, heterodox thinker. ik Hegel was very influenced by him but that's about where my knowledge ends, I'm not that interested in Hegel sadly (should I be?)
>Future generations motto will be "nothing ever happens"how did he know?
shit thread that annoyed me.
>>24749670Idealism is a fuzzy word but I mean specifically the classical Germans. I love the Cambridge companions; do menial work at a university and can get full free access on my work phone so often read them while going between job sites and whatnot. I must say though this is a super pseud opinion but I don't enjoy reading secondary literature, these guys mostly are not geniuses and their opinions can be problematic in the extreme. I do not believe that any professor simply because he is a professor will understand a philosopher better than any moderately intelligent person who has carefully and repeatedly read the philosopher's works. Hegel is an incredibly based, he found a new way of thinking. But he's hard to sum up except in some vague disappointing shit like "everything's connected", "substance is subject" etc. His philosophy by design rejects any simple judgments in philosophy, but if you're just shit-posting about philosophers on 4chan, simple judgments are all you have. So I can come up with cheap summations and shitposts for any philosopher I've read but with Hegel not so much.
By weakest reading year so far.I enjoyed none of these books even though I really wanted to read them.What should I do? I've read at least one book of most big name writers hoping I would develop a taste on my own but it hasn't happened yet and I'm thinking of quitting literature altogether.
>>24748756>>24748751Alfred Birnbaum was the translator of Hardboiled Wonderland which had over 100 pages cut.He may have done the same to Norwegian Wood and others and he isn't the only translator to do so.
>>24748418For real my guy. I just ordered the Neapolitan Novels. But i've heard Elsa Morante has been a great influence on Ferrante and she has like 2 big novels I would like to read before the Ferrante tetralogy.After that idk I may try Sally Rooney or KMS who knows
Read:>Justine, by SadeRepetitive, but also great. I loved all the philosophical digressions about nature. It also really prepared me for—>Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Beyond Good & Evil, On the Genealogy of Morals, Ecce Homo, Human, All Too Human (I & II), The Will to Power, and The Gay Science, by NietzscheTo read all these together also proved repetitive, but the ideas about the will and overcoming were comforting and instructive. Felt he was at his best when writing aphorisms. Nietzsche should have been a creative writer.>Whore, Hysteric, Exit, and Burqa of Skin, by Nelly ArcanLoved how she played with the barriers of autofiction (if it’s even appropriate to call them that). Really blunt and brutal and depressing books. Criminally under read.>Spy in the House of Love, by NinI still prefer her erotic story collections I think, but this book proved to me that she’s as good and important a Modernist author as anyone else. The prose was so smooth and beautiful.>Is There a Text in this Class?, by FishEveryone should read about interpretative communities. Great essay collection.>Wisdom & Metaphor, by ZwickyWish more essays were written like this, formally, with the claims on the left-hand page, and the quotes on the right. Enjoyable if self-indulgent and susceptible to idle musing.>Decreation, by CarsonLoved the oratorio on guns.Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>24748307R8 me /lit/ Young Men and FireJesus of Nazareth: The Infancy NarrativesOne Day in the Life of Ivan DenisovichAdult Children of Emotionally Immature ParentsThe Lost City of the Monkey GodTravels with Charley: In Search of AmericaVoices from ChernobylWill You Please Be Quiet, PleaseAnimal Wise: The Thoughts and Emotions of Our Fellow CreaturesButchers CrossingOut of the Silent PlanetMedium Raw: A Bloody Valentine to the World of Food and the People Who CookThrough A Glass, Darkly: Sir Aurthur Conan Doyle and the Quest to Solve the Greatest Mystery of AllComment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>24749510What would you say motivates your choices in books?
