Prop 1 - Substance is by nature prior to its modificationsSubstance is prior to modificications (modes), this makes both logical and ontological sense, in that substance is that which is in in itself and is conceived through itself, in that it is a self sufficient, self caused entity that cannot be contingent upon anything external. Spinoza presents his proof through definitions 3 and 5 as it logically follows, however here I will give more context. This establishes substance as the ontological foundation of reality in that God is not the divine creator of the world, but rather that god is the world, within all that exists. In such substance which is infinite, eternal and indivisible. This rejects the classic view of god (maybe why he got kicked out of the jewish church) that god sits apart from the world. In this modes, or determinations of substance, are not substances in themselves but exist within the substance, in such they are dependent on its existence. In link to Axiom 1, “Everything that is, is either in itself or in another.” (pls read the other writing on axioms for clarification) which reaffirms the ontological priority of substance over its modes, modes are in substance but substance is not in any mode. This reflects Spinoza's claim that all that exists as finite expressions of the infinite attributes of god, this undermines the notion of a transcendent deity, in that Spinoza's god is positioned as necessary to the constitution of all being.
>>24953333>In such all events are born from necessity with the ultimate ground lying within the nature of god or nature (deus sive natura) It is important to note god is also bound by necessity!Yes, his God is mere mechanism and non-differentiated uniformity. I thought we went over this.>>24953336Immutable. I know exactly what it is you're trying to do here, by the way, but Spinoza's God is really nothing like the Christian God (who is defined by his transcendental nature instead of brute emergence as a result of exhausting all potentialities) at all. If anything, this poster who is far more clever than me >>24951542 made the astute observation that de Sade is closer to a Christ-like figure in Spinoza's framework, and Christ himself the Anti-Christ.
>>24953373But not really. Sade is a social free radical. Anyone with even a cursory examination of the actual ethics in Ethics would see why that is incorrect. But the issue is even though Spinoza wrote a treatise with the utmost rigour to demonstrate his position and its logical conclusions, it is easier for his opponents to ignore his arguments and just posit ridiculousness.
>>24953388>Anyone with even a cursory examination of the actual ethics in Ethics would see why that is incorrect.It doesn't matter because Spinoza does not answer the problem of evil. >But the issue is even though Spinoza wrote a treatise with the utmost rigour to demonstrate his position and its logical conclusions, it is easier for his opponents to ignore his arguments and just posit ridiculousness.This sterile rationalist anti-humanism is exactly why Spinoza is and will remain a relic of the enlightenment.
>>24953398Spinoza addresses the problem of evil at length, and also clarifies it in his letters
>>24953388The universal laws of reason which should rule society and individuals are not separated from the universal laws of nature, you should know that this was the conception of 18th century French Enlightenment.
What is the oldest book you've read that really disturbed youI just finished reading Matthew Lewis' The Monk and was surprised by how brutal it still is after over two centuries
>>24953510>Blackwood's Baby is not in Occultationi've read other stories of his apart from occultation online and in collections>Also, isn't he just taking inspiration from other authors and making his own stories of them, instead of just making a pastiche?blackwoods baby is a pastiche. a pastiche that fails at being a pastiche and fails at being an original story. he fails at being a good writer.
>>24953391I only really disliked Vastation in this collection. I'd easily consider it the best of the trio. Imago, I thought had the most of interesting concepts, but Occultation had better depth to the stories I did consider good.
>>24953520I thought that in general, the stories in Occultation were well written. "Catch Hell" was clearly inspired by Machen, but he made it his own story, and the same is true for "Strappado", my favourite from the collection, which was inspired by Poe but feels original and its own work.
Guess who just found a copy of picrel for cheap :D
>>24953564the forest is the greatest story in that collection but is marred by the mundane aspects of the story which ruin the horrific revelation
Do you guys ever check out little free libraries
>>24952635I put Orbit #10 in one because I wanted to buy a higher quality copy for my collection.I also put an unread copy of the Man who fell to Earth for reasons I won't go into.
>>24952635when I get the chance
>>24952769pinchone is woke garbage for midwits
>>24953339gotta read it to find out
>>24952815The library does not have good quality books, you fucking prole.
I think it's impossible to make money off of sharing abstract knowledge. Can you prove me wrong?Because I've tried to make money off talking about philosophy and its just futile. I thought of the 48 laws of power for instance and then I realized that book is just obvious hot garbage.I thought of so many other things like economists, internet bloggers, and even psychologists. And they're all either just spewing lies and falsehoods, writing a whole load of useless filler, or making money in some weird abusive way like taking taxpayer dollars, embarrassing college campus kids or something like that.I think if I could go back in time with the best writing possible, I couldn't convince anyone that the Earth revolves around the sun in a way that makes me money...
>>24952773It's not impossible because people have done it and still do it. What you mean is: it's very hard, and a lot of factors go into it. Yes, indeed. That's not a particularly unique insight.
>>24952773the only way to make money through mere knowledge (so not skill e.g knowing how to do x but rather knowing that x) is through deceit and corruption, see charles ponzi and wallace fard muhammad or joseph smith.
>no tomoko gfWhy do I even bother
>>24952876Technical is not abstract
>>24952895If you gave an example it would be someone making money through other means than being abstract, I gaurantee
>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.
>>24948996>>24949496>>24950892>>24950924>>24950971>>24951539>>24953022I don't know how you think her face isn't ugly. Desperation?
>>24950979Whichever one is a virgin before marriage and veils outside the house
>>24953058
Reported
>>24953547The chinks are probably your best bet then.
Recommend some Soviet literature to me.
>>24948657The Doomed City by the Strugatsky'sStrugatskies? Strugatskis.
>>24948657Khrushchev Remembers - a series of his speeches, memoirs and stories that leaked to the West in the early '70's. Commentary and notes by Edward Crankshaw. It's a real eye-opener with great behind-the-scenes info. Also, Inside Stalin's Kremlin - written by a KGB defector, if I recall.
>>24948657ilyenkov
>>24949019>>24950630These
>>24948657Mathematics: Its Content, Method and Meaning
What the FUCK was Stephen King thinking?
>>24951199Than why are they so goddamn retarded?
>>24952325When women run a train on a man, they turn him out, he's just some whore, the straight version of IT.
>>24951534When it's time to penetrate, it's best if the girl left out is going in between you and the other girl. She kisses you while she gets eaten out, or vice versa, for example. It's okay if you're the one giving pleasure to both sometimes but if that's the case there are other times where you're getting pleasured by both as well.
>>24953303>>When it's time to penetrate, it's best if the girl left out is going in between you and the other girl. She kisses you while she gets eaten out, or vice versa, for example.What the fuck am I reading. Can you elaborate on this position.
>>24936316The flight logs to Epstein's Lolita Express were released in 2014 or something. We also have pictures of Quentin Tarantino sucking on little girl feet on the Lolita Express, and photos of Epstein at the British royal family's vacation home. I dont know why people need a different list when we already have so much proof of who Epstein was friends with.
>>24951951I'm just saying streams is such a great liberty when the whisps of hair at the neck have been eroticised everywhere forever. It gives the impression Ovid is carrying through the water nymph origin and the river answering her to write streams, and there isn't textual support for that. It's a poetic translation which doesn't hew to the original meaning, while OP's isn't really losing or inventing meaning or metaphor.
>>24952014I think the emphasis is on flight rather than erotism in this particular line. The hair is first eroticized, including Phoebus fantasizing about what various forms it could be in. Then it signifies motion: the hair that was hanging and an object of fascinating and fantasy is now disrupted. Then it signifies frozen stillness when it transforms into leaves; in seeking to capture the flux of beauty, he kills it, since the central theme of the Metamorphoses is, after all, process philosophy. Then at last it is resurrected to his original admiration as her hair is now made to entwine with his and becomes a symbol of style.
>>24951471No that's not obvious at all, you're just asserting that.
>>24952421The translator adding "white" to it doesn't make it contextually clear?
>>24952243I think you can't translate from your first sentence tbph because it's literally about Phoebus breathing into the back of her neck in horny pursuit. I suggest you learn Latin to translate it.
Redpill me on Dr. William Pierce. Are his works worth reading?
I want to know why any of these people even exist. Why does race realism or the right-wing require books, authors or figureheads to distort what is evident? For thousands of years we had people accepting there's differences in races and traditions existed for numerous benefits, and we still have that, yet for some reason we also have these strange grifters trying to weaponize these fundamental things that people often realize on their own. I liken it to trying to arm blades of grass, derivative as that concept might be. What's the point? Even if they'll tell you otherwise, nobody is going to be happy a nigger is approaching them on the street at 2AM or all the silicon CEOs are becoming Indian and Chinese. They know why that displeases them, the understanding arrives to them more readily than anything. Nobody is scratching their head desperately trying to rationalize why pale skin and fair, nicely-sculpted features are desirable in every culture. Yet much like organized religion there just has to be a bunch of assholes trying to "human up" things that merely are with scripture, documents, theories, rules, blablabla.
>>249533221Again the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, 2Son of man, speak to the children of thy people, and say unto them, When I bring the sword upon a land, if the people of the land take a man of their coasts, and set him for their watchman: 3If when he seeth the sword come upon the land, he blow the trumpet, and warn the people; 4Then whosoever heareth the sound of the trumpet, and taketh not warning; if the sword come, and take him away, his blood shall be upon his own head. 5He heard the sound of the trumpet, and took not warning; his blood shall be upon him. But he that taketh warning shall deliver his soul. 6But if the watchman see the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the people be not warned; if the sword come, and take any person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at the watchman's hand.7So thou, O son of man, I have set thee a watchman unto the house of Israel; therefore thou shalt hear the word at my mouth, and warn them from me. 8When I say unto the wicked, O wicked man, thou shalt surely die; if thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand. 9Nevertheless, if thou warn the wicked of his way to turn from it; if he do not turn from his way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul.10Therefore, O thou son of man, speak unto the house of Israel; Thus ye speak, saying, If our transgressions and our sins be upon us, and we pine away in them, how should we then live? 11Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel? 12Therefore, thou son of man, say unto the children of thy people, The righteousness of the righteous shall not deliver him in the day of his transgression: as for the wickedness of the wicked, he shall not fall thereby in the day that he turneth from his wickedness; neither shall the righteous be able to live for his righteousness in the day that he sinneth. 13When I shall say to the righteous, that he shall surely live; if he trust to his own righteousness, and commit iniquity, all his righteousnesses shall not be remembered; but for his iniquity that he hath committed, he shall die for it. 14Again, when I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; if he turn from his sin, and do that which is lawful and right; 15If the wicked restore the pledge, give again that he had robbed, walk in the statutes of life, without committing iniquity; he shall surely live, he shall not die. 16None of his sins that he hath committed shall be mentioned unto him: he hath done that which is lawful and right; he shall surely live.
>>24953322Because the west has obviously lost most traces of ethnocentrism that anywhere else are considered normal. Remember that even the supposed far right feels the need to justify its people existence with things like IQ and crime statistics, as if self preservation wasn't enough. Such people would be rightfully made fun of during most of history for being maggots, as if your people needed to be economically expedient to justify its existence.
>>24952971Wasn‘t he revealed to have been using C18 as a honeypot?
>>24953322It's simply the fact that the less intelligent you are and the more emotional you are about your perception of reality the easier you are to grift. Racism has zero scientific support, but the point of racist screed is never to actually provide challenge based on evidence, it's to gain political leverage by appeal to oversimplifications. The entire enterprise is based around hand-waving, cherry-picking and counting on simplemindedness. Your post provides excellent examples of such, for example, this entire sentence:>Even if they'll tell you otherwise, nobody is going to be happy a nigger is approaching them on the street at 2AM or all the silicon CEOs are becoming Indian and Chinese.Is one long string of stereotypes, racist prejudices and conspiracy theories. But that doesn't matter, because it has accrued the layers and layers of racist assumptions passed memetically among the people it's meant to recruit, such as: black people are scary, Asians are ruthlessly competitive or hard-working or nepotistic (the particular variant of the belief changes to fit the situation). None of these were ever meant to be examined, because they're meant to appeal to a public conditioned by repetition of anecdotes and largely unaware of any discourse around the racism beyond what loudest racist can hock at them, online or offline.
Desperately reconcile with your irredeemable faith, sheep.
>>24953111Every man under 30 knows nick and his videos have millions of views Why do old troons millennials seethe over him, you had ur time in 2016 time to give it up unc
>>24953482Great. Do something real with it.
>>24953530They are, you genX old troon. Nick is the only in exposing Jews and why we are funding a genocide of Palestinians
>>24953544Talking on the internet isn‘t doing something, little buddy. If you were unaware: that‘s why the genocide hasn‘t stopped.
>>24953114>>24953128Difficult problems can only be productively approached in written form. Simple as.Anyone focused on verbal discourse and scoring points has implicitly given up on real intellectual work.
>>24952049My favourite book is his first and it makes me not want to read any of his other works as I strongly imagine he peaked in the first go...
I understand what Houellebecq was trying to get across, but all the pseudo scientific passages are lame.>>24952081Agreed. A much better depiction of rotten contemporary life than showing the life of a public masturbator and an incel nerd.
>>24952049It is barely a novel. The closest Houellebecq has gotten to literature is La possibilité d’une île.
>>24952084>Serotonin felt so rough and off-the-cuffThat's why it's better.
>>24952049It's beautiful tribute to Carl Sagan. Which I binged to afterwards to have the childhood I never had. I was never really interested in Hole Back.I find his personality a nuisance.
This is horrifying. Is there a better way than Christianity to transcend this?
>>24948191Thank you, Jesus
>>24950501>muh acknowledgementnigger tier
>>24952737>Just that and nothing else?i got called a glowie for asking for more
>>24952717I am, thank you
>>24952187Wittgenstein as a primer worked better than Nietzsche for me.T. I've never truly understood Nietzsche.
Penguin always seem to have the best covers but it seems gay to just have a shelf of Penguin stuff. What do?
>>24953206What the fuck are you doing with your books?I have penguin paperbacks I've read 6 or 7 times and they're fine apart of very minor aesthetic damage
>>24953450Your aesthetics are trash, you stupid commie.
>>249534806 7
>>24952906abebooks>>24953450he's right>>24953486valuing soul over market trends is in fact the true commie position
>>24952906Embrace the gay. >>24953115I like my books read, but to each his own I guess.
Give me some good 20th century French Romantic 100-150 page novels
Buump
Can this fucking board be useful for once
>>24953197>20th century French Romantic
>>24953197I'm afraid romance was dead an buried by the 20th century, OP.
>>24953197Why'd you write "French Romantic" like it's an established literary movement? Did you mean "romantic French?"
What books should I read in public to attract women?
>>24953283Golly jolly, I'm howling lolling!
>>24953260James Marsden looking motherfucker.
>>24953260Quran to scare every hoe in the vicinity
>>24953425
>>24953426women should not have the right to vote
