None More Black Edition>Old:>>25000152>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
>>25009174Uh, nta, but Madoka?
>>25009177oh yeah madoka thx
is anything by sandermeme good?
>>25009077only the ones by Adams.i did like artemis fowl, but the concept of someone continuing a series after the author's death like that feels very disrespectful. i'll treat it as it's own thing
>>25009151Calm down, Dumas.
Is Simone Weil some kind of atheist or what? I don't understand her at all.
>>25006399It delights me to know that these two vile creatures disliked each other. Not even feminist scum can get along with each other.>Oh no! Muh Chinese are starving>Let me support a philosophy in my adoptive homeland that produces the same effect
>>25002310Simone Weil distinguishes between an atheism that rejects false, consoling images of God and an atheism that denies transcendence altogether. The first, which she paradoxically values, purifies the idea of God by refusing any deity that can be grasped, used, or made to explain away evil; it is closer to negative theology than to disbelief and is exemplified by Richard Dawkins and secular humanism. The second type, which she rejects, refuses the existence of any absolute good or reality beyond material necessity. In Weil’s terms, figures like Nick Land and H. P. Lovecraft exemplify this latter atheism: their visions of a cosmos governed by blind forces, inhuman necessity, or indifferent horror leave no room for transcendence, love, or truth beyond power. Where Weil sees honest negation as a possible path toward God, this darker atheism closes the path entirely.
>>25003057English language poetry sucks ass and has been downhill since Romanticism.
>>25002325This.
>>25009219quite a funny last ditch attempt but i don’t know why you thought this would work against someone who apparently reads poetry.
>Edgar Allen Poe's Extraordinary Tales translated by Charles Baudelaire>Raymond Chandler's The Big Sleep translated by Boris Vian>Virginia Wolf's The Waves translated by Marguerite Yourcenar Why do the French have such great translations? English translation is always done by some literal nobody.
>>25009101>>25009105Obviously there are many examples and off the top of my head I can think of at least a dozen others, but you're being awfully rude and haven't even said 'please' so I don't think I will.
>>25009132>I could but I won'tYou're just mad you got called out. By the way, before the 20th century, who the fuck do you think "into English" translators were? They were people like Alexander Pope or Samuel Johnson. And yes, I could name plenty more, but I won't :^)Even the likes of Paul Auster have famously translated novels. So take that faggot. I've bested you until you can provide copious examples to back your claim.
>>25009185>Alexander PopeWho? >Samuel JohnsonOkay that's pretty cool. Loved him in Reasonable Doubt. >Paul Auster From the opium family? Trust fund kids aren't impressive.If you wanted to name an impressive translator, idk, you could have mentioned Nabokov. But he also translated all of his work into French, so I guess that would just be a self-own, doubtlessly why you had to settle on a bunch of literary backbenchers I've never heard of. Nice try though.
>>25009185NTA, but here's some more examples.>Edgar Allan Poe's The Raven translated by Charles Baudelaire>Edgar Allan Poe's The Tell-Tale Heart translated by Théophile Gautier>Mary Shelley's Frankenstein translated by Jules Claretie>Edgar Allan Poe's The Fall of the House of Usher translated by Charles Asselineau>Nathaniel Hawthorne's The Scarlet Letter translated by Anatole France
>>25009202Totally forgot about Théophile Gautier, nice catch anon.
Kantianism is midwit philosophy. Nietzscheanism beats it as the high IQ philosophy
>>25009236just read the critique of pure reason... you will find a lot of original ideas in there... the whole book is new and original... it prepares for something even better
>>25009248>Are you retarded? I'm not talking about you, I specifically referenced his views on himself....to me, who knows all this stuff already you fucking pseud. i naturally assumed you were implying i believed the opposite of what you were saying or i was ignorant of what you were saying, because most human communication is implicit you fucking dumbass
>>25009255>quote an authors views>get called a pseudYou got sensitive too soon. You've outed yourself as a complete fool. Send me your address so I can Amazon deliver some wipes to clean up the slobber from your keyboard and armor you with a necessary safety helmet. And for God's sake, stop eating crayons.
>>25009261yeah my bad, i tried to interpret the intentions of a vegetable that spouts non sequiturs
>>25009266>i tried to interpret the intentions of a vegetable that spouts non sequiturs
Why is this book held in such high regard? Its sole purpose seems to be trashing Southern Whites and at times borders on torture porn
>>25005380>>25005388>>25005403>>25006302>>25006314>>25006887>>25007246CopeSoutherners are the only americans left who cluster with their british forefathersEllis Island trash are not americans
>>25006652I'm a middle class british man and it hit incredibly close to home
>>25007178Who cares what some pseuds think?
I read the sound and the fury and it was utter dogshit I genuinely think it's just celebrated because it's propaganda for race commies
>>25004583Southern white-trash hicks are subhuman and more than deserve any negative portrayal they get in media.
>Now, let us design the ideal government, using only facts and logic.>To begin with, consider the case of a man with a magic ring that turns him invisible.
>>25007546yeah i know. i made it.
>>25007262I mean, it's a good thought experiment. It asks you to imagine someone who can get away with anything without consequence, and to consider if anything could control their behaviour.
>>25007880Ideas can control behavior. Ideas themselves are selected for and compete in much the same way that living things do. Unlike most life, however, ideas cannot exist on their own. They must parasitize a host to propagate and ensure their continued existence. Thus, ideas that are uniquely effective in steering the behavior of hosts towards the survival of the idea (rather than the host) have become immensely popular and widespread.A person who is free from negative consequences of action is not automatically free from these ideas. They may still be parasitized and bound to values inserted to serve the idea rather than themselves. In other words they do not act because they are convinced of negative consequence where there are none.
>>25007262>let's design our ideal government>now consider a man that is not subject to justiceHere you go, retard
>>25007262>using only facts and logicabsolutely nothing this dick ever wrote was based on "facts", just pedantry and false analogies
Holy shit this chud was right about everything
>>25008886yeah opting out and hoping the superintelligence regards us as ants or wildlife creatures that it allows to survive is probably the most moral choice. thats how i feel having thought about it (and being a person without any sort of influence over anything)
anyone think he looks like the guy who played dick winters in band of brothers
>>25007287Thanks, Right on the Money #2 was really good. It answered the economic problem I always had with Land's work about how you overcome a systemic crisis of overproduction/underconsumption
>>25008886>>25008914The difference with Nick Land is that he regards this process and inevitable and never paints it as a particularly good thing. You ask him what the future looks like, he says Neuromancer or Blade Runner
>>25009240>its gonna be just like shadowrun guiseYou should be embarrassed for indulging this methheads psychosis
>A paradigm-shifting account of the modern Jewish experience, from one of the most creative young historians of his generationTo understand the organizing framework of modern Judaism, Eliyahu Stern believes that we should look deeper and farther than the Holocaust, the establishment of the State of Israel, and the influence and affluence of American Jewry. Against the revolutionary backdrop of mid-nineteenth-century Europe, Stern unearths the path that led a group of rabbis, scientists, communal leaders, and political upstarts to reconstruct the core tenets of Judaism and join the vanguard of twentieth-century revolutionary politics.In the face of dire poverty and rampant anti-Semitism, they mobilized Judaism for projects directed at ensuring the fair and equal distribution of resources in society. Their program drew as much from the universalism of Karl Marx and Charles Darwin as from the messianism and utopianism of biblical and Kabbalistic works. Once described as a religion consisting of rituals, reason, and rabbinics, Judaism was now also rooted in land, labor, and bodies. Exhaustively researched, this original, revisionist account challenges our standard narratives of nationalism, secularization, and de-Judaization.>Eliyahu Stern is associate professor of modern Jewish intellectual and cultural history at Yale University. He is the author of The Genius: Elijah of Vilna and the Making of Modern Judaism and has served as a term member on the Council on Foreign Relations and a consultant to the Museum of the History of Polish Jews in Warsaw, Poland.
>>25006522Not quite.Whites are too antagonistic towards each other to allow for too appeasing narratives to fester. Even when whites were destroying the red race, plenty of Europeans took the side of the reds. If you look at Palestine, jews are a golem, an individual golem.
>>25006522Your slipup either claims that all the books promoting white guilt are made by non-whites (of which the majority are jews) or that they simply do not exact.
>>25008339Plenty of antisemitic books by Jews
>>25004559Jews have never gotten over the fact that they killed their God. They all know they did it, deep down, and they've lived with the hangover of the deed ever since.
>>25009245This is just cope.The fact is, a Jewish person can worship their religion without giving any thought or credence to Christianity or Islam.The same cannot be said for Christianity or Islam. Both have to (reluctantly) admit that there is some special quality among Jews that at some point in their history they were prophetic people. Both have to also retrospectively reinterpret the jewish faith as one that predicts the coming of Jesus/Mohammad etcIn fact, a Jewish individual would look at Jesus and see a deeply evil man whose entire shtick was a diabolical plot to eradicate judaism by rendering the covenent null.
Writing style alignment editionPrevious: >>24999041/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.Discuss the written works below 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.Shitposters should be ignored and reported.Beginner guides on writing:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHdzv1NfZRMComment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>25008655Okay good to know. you can still read the transcript
>>25008661Yeah, it is a bit cheesy. It was kind of intentional because he's not really a noble knight. He's more like a brute enforcer.
Lawful Pantser here. How do I stop the unintended strange consequences and bring order to my new realm?
>>25008682I'm not reading 3500 words in this format. You can present in a reasonable way.
>>25007305Not writers block, but drive to sit down and write. When I draw I get serious art block and same face / same pose, but writing is effortless when I do it. Do you post anywhere else, I've enjoyed these blurbs.
I need book suggestions based on this idea I have for a novel:>new viral disease reaches pandemic levels>starts with flu like symptoms>leads to deadly brain inflammation and death in those with already compromised health>lowers IQ>progresses to various forms of frontal lobe damage >erratic behavior, memory loss, speech disorders and personality changes such as total loss of inhibition>tons of bizzarro world behavior >ends with a violent zombie like state before death >5 childhood friends deal with the issues arising, they mourn the changes their family members undergo >one of them catches the disease, confronts traumas in the form of hallucinations and out of bodies experiences before believing himself to be his own father and committing suicide mimicking his own father's suicide >crescendo is them fleeing a mob of crazed homeless people, one girl gets separated and raped >one guy commits a heroic sacrifice in order to save his girlfriend and gets stabbed to death in a stairwell>body of the novel consists mostly of trying to stay safe, keeping up with the news, while going about their day to day life as the disease progresses and things start falling apartComment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>25009197The west post 2020
>>25009210precisely what my main inspiration is. I'm basically writing future headlines
>>25009197I'm pretty sure this is just the plot of The Walking Dead.
Books that changed you or your perception of the world, that made you divide your life in before and after them,
>>25008484it's a critique of husserl (phenomenology as epistemology), but also of all western philosophy, since he thinks they are all driven by the same impulses, and have the same problems, the problem of the concept of a first or something on which epistemology could be based, which actually presupposes the identity of thought and being, and thus was latent in parmenides. it's basically an inverted hegelian view of the history of philosophy, where western philosophy is all developments of the same starting point, but in adorno, it's a bad thing. >>25007466the sutra itself is some kind of hyperphantasic cosmic vision, the main effect of reading it comes from its endless repetitions and variations, I can't describe the effect of reading the sutra itself, but the introduction written by Thomas Clearly changed the way I think permanently. He describes how huayan buddhism overcomes all previous schools of buddhism by surpassing one-sided views. people typically look at nagarjuna's philosophy of emptiness as the most profound statement of buddhism, but there are actually several stages higher than that.
>>25008103For me the side effect was more so taking occultist influence more seriously, I was never much of a Hegel fan and the first time I read Goethe's criticism of him I immediately agreed with it. The more interesting part was looking for religious motivations in everyone else, a lot of times thinkers would just repeat their religion's ideas with some make up on top as if it was completely new. Nietzsche also helped with that given the whole genealogy thing.As for what to get out of all of this I would say a lot of ideas have been repeated for at least 1000 years, just go to the source. A lot of the supposedly Christian mysticism many philosophers dabbled with is just kabbalah, for example. For an example in politics: there were "globalists" in Rome as well. And when you read about the origin of things there tends to be less bells and whistles.
Reverend Insanity
>>25007304Kind of prepared me for this day and age
>Schleiden told the philosopher Rudolf Eucken that Gauss read Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason five times. The fifth time he is reported to have said: ‘Now it’s dawning on me.”
>>25008194that's really all their is to if. you just keep banging yourself over the head with it until one day it clicks
Makes sense. Gauss was formally trained as a mathematician so other disciplines will take a bit of a windup.
>>25008194This only happened because Gauss didn't have the Cambridge Edition. It is also true for every famous work of philosophy. We lived in blessed times
>smartest 18th century revolutionary mathematician>too low IQ to easily grasp epistemological metaphysicsalso funny to think the anti-pytagorean read Kant
>>25008194yeah this never happened, Gauss thought philosophers were retarded.
English is not my first language, but im already at C1 level. Which literature book should i read to improve it?I mostly read non fiction about tech or crime.Would Mark Twain and Dickens be appropriate? If not, what should i read?Btw im not indian, dont worry. Im argentinian.
>>25008070ShakespeareJohnsonDickensJames
>>25008070Ulysses
>>25008080>>25009166no
No I think Dickens would be a mistakeGive Raymond Chandler, Hemingway, Orwell, Dashiell Hammett and John le Carré a tryDon't bother if it's really difficult
Bonaventure’s metaphysics is superior to that of Aquinas insofar as it preserves the intrinsic intelligibility of being by refusing to sever ontology from its epistemic and exemplar causes. Against Thomistic abstractionism, Bonaventure argues that ens creatum cannot ground its own intelligibility through the mere actus essendi abstracted from sensibles, since abstraction yields at best a conceptual universal lacking the necessity required for certitude. In the Collationes in Hexaëmeron and the Itinerarium mentis in Deum, he insists that intelligibility presupposes participation in the rationes aeternae, such that every act of genuine intellection implicitly refers to an exemplar order in the divine intellect. This move avoids the latent nominalism implicit in Aquinas’ account, wherein being is treated as epistemically neutral and self-disclosing prior to illumination. By contrast, Bonaventure’s metaphysics secures the conditions of possibility for knowledge by grounding ontology, logic, and epistemology in a single explanatory principle: participated likeness to the first Truth. The result is a system in which necessity, universality, and intelligibility are not postulated but metaphysically explained.Moreover, Bonaventure’s rejection of the primacy of esse in favor of the transcendentals of goodness, light, and exemplarity yields a more coherent account of participation and causality. Aquinas’ analogy of being, while formally elegant, risks rendering the analogate opaque, since ipsum esse subsistens is posited as metaphysically primary without a corresponding account of how finite intellects can apprehend being as such without already presupposing illumination. Bonaventure avoids this circularity by articulating an analogy of light, in which being is intelligible only insofar as it is irradiated by divine exemplarity, thus preserving the hierarchical structure of reality without collapsing epistemic access into angelic intuition. His metaphysics therefore maintains a strict asymmetry between Creator and creature while still accounting for real participation, something Aquinas’ autonomous natural metaphysics struggles to secure without supplementary theological premises. In this sense, Bonaventure’s system is not merely more theologically integrated but more logically coherent, since it explicitly thematizes the conditions under which being can be known at all rather than tacitly assuming them.
>>25007998>Anyone who has even an intermediate understanding of Platonism and Christian theology and who had read even 1 or 2 of Augustine’s major works would find OP’s post totally comprehensibleThe problem wasn't comprehension of the terms, in fact the point seems to have been describing terms, but rather that none of them are substantiated or supported. If you go into a pure-math environment and someone asks for proofs and you desist and keep saying that "it's well understood" they'll call you out for not knowing how to derive proofs and you wouldn't even be in the conversation from then on out. That's what we're dealing with here. The defense for OP seems to be an implied argument that Christian beliefs from a very particular brand need to be accepted at face value with no work being done.>This thread was directed at that sort of audienceSo you agree that the thread was designed to cater to those who already agree with it- but that's not really the point of the board and you ought not to have expected such a ridiculous scenario. Most people here aren't Christian.>If you are going to continue to be insufferable while also adding nothing of valueWe're the ones questioning the value of OPs post. He's obviously very proud of himself for listing out Latin terms, which anyone with a passing knowledge of first year Latin will have derived for themselves, but he doesn't actually make any serious arguments or build any ideas. He's just parroting what someone who he thinks is esoteric said. The problem is that the work itself is not very obscure and the attempt to mimic technical jargon and bring that to the world of theology falls flat because it's not really all that complex or hindered. Three people in the opening comments called it word salad- because it is. It's a vacuous post that never presented value in the first place. The reason for me bringing this up is because Christians can and should do better. If you want to be respected, don't play at being an intellectual- be an intellectual. That doesn't come from parroting arguments but pulling the substance for oneself. The real genius would have been crystallizing Aquinas VS Bonaventure in fewer words, not just echoing.>>25008611It isn't. /his/ and /x/ are unironically more Christian in general.
>>25004858>Bonaventure’s metaphysics is superior to that of Aquinas as it preserves the intrinsic intelligibility of being by refusing to sever ontology from its epistemic causes. Bonaventure argues that ens creatum cannot ground its own intelligibility through the mere actus essendi abstracted from sensibles, since abstraction yields at best a conceptual universal. He insists that intelligibility presupposes participation, that every act of genuine intellect implicitly refers to an epistemic order in the divine intellect.>This avoids the latent nominalism implicit in Aquinas’ account, where being is treated as epistemically neutral and self-disclosing prior to illumination. By contrast, Bonaventure’s metaphysics secure the conditions of possibility for knowledge by grounding ontology, logic, and epistemology in a single explanatory principle: participated likeness. The result is a system in which necessity, universality, and intelligibility are not postulated but metaphysically explained.>Bonaventure’s rejection of the primacy of esse in favor of the transcendentals of goodness, light, and exemplarity yields a more coherent account of participation and causality. Aquinas’ analogy of being risks rendering the analogate opaque, since being-itself is posited as metaphysically primary without a corresponding account of how finite intellects can apprehend being as such without already presupposing illumination. Bonaventure avoids this circularity by articulating an analogy of light in which being is intelligible only insofar as it is radiated by divine exemplarity, thus preserving the hierarchical structure of reality without collapsing epistemic access into angelic institutions.>His metaphysics therefore maintains a strict asymmetry between Creator and creature while still accounting for real participation, something Aquinas’ autonomous natural metaphysics struggles to secure without supplementary theological premises. In this sense, Bonaventure’s system is not merely more theologically integrated but more logically coherent, since it thematizes the conditions under which being can be known at all rather than tacitly assuming them.This is the better version. "Exemplarity" should be elided because it's a term that widens the meaning of text instead of narrowing it, making it a dirty word. Yes, it's an established term, and that's the mistake of the original authors. "Angelic intuitions" is subbed for institutions, from verb to noun, because it's too much to presuppose that angels even exist much less act, so to establish the noun first is to give credence to the existence of angels without having to make a second leap that angels have intuition and that other beings are subordinated to their "intuition"- an intrinsically material being's notion of perception.
if god is real how come I can't see im
>>25009180>since abstraction yields at best a conceptual universalHe's kind of undermining himself by suggesting that a conceptual universe isn't enough. To engage in any of this discussion is to presume that conceptualization is enough.>Bonaventure’s metaphysics secures the conditions of possibility for knowledge by grounding ontology, logic, and epistemology in a single explanatory principle: participated likeness to the first TruthThe whole point seems to argue that an act of intellect is to be part of subordination to a God, but then avoids explaining the process from God to subordinates. In fact, it seems like he's arguing in favor of copying the Gnostics but just erasing all of their work and just assuming they're right in order to avoid falling into accusations of heresy or technical fumbling. >Aquinas’ analogy of being, while formally elegant, risks rendering the analogate opaque, since ipsum esse subsistens is posited as metaphysically primary without a corresponding account of how finite intellects can apprehend being as such without already presupposing illuminationMore nonsense. For one, Bonaventure is already presupposing bonds between intellect and the divine without securing a direct route, for two Aquinas is using being the same way that Bonaventure is using intellect so Bony is just shifting the problem somewhere else instead of solving it, thirdly shifting the problem to intellect makes even less sense because being is universal and shared material experience whereas intellect isn't, fourthly presupposing illumination depends on one's assessment of what illumination is supposed to be. If it's an abstract notion of intelligence being the manifestation of God's light then it needs to be explained why being is not representative of that. I illumination is just God's energetic power, then of course it's presupposed and it would just straight up be Satanic to argue against it as a presupposition since it would deny God's capacity to act itself.
>>25004858could you say this in a language other the one you invented to speak with your dead twin, thanks
it precludes us from staying in touch with the primal reality of change & becoming. to intellectually apprehend it isn't the same as directly experiencing itthus, consumption of the apollonian drug must ceaseor is it congenial to indulge in psychostimulants to our hearts' content; thereby ignoring heraclitus' moving world for the sake of a still world? but is there such thing? a still world
>>25008569We'll try.
>>25007370it's more about tea vs coffee
This thread inspired me to break out this book A Short History of Coffee. So far it's mostly been about how it was insanely popular (first) in the middle east yet was condemned repeatedly by authorities. And that basically after that it was European merchants and monks who brought it back to Europe in the 16th century. That's where I'm at in the book right now.
>>25008528Alcohol has stimulant properties.
OP BTFO
