This is my interpretation as someone who hasn't read the Metaphysics yet, but I have read the Physics and On the Soul. Infinite in the category of quantity is a potentiality rather than an actuality, which is consistent with modern math, as infinity is not defined as a number but as a limit, but in this case at least infinity makes sense as a potential. On other hand, in the category of substance infinity is more nonsensical, because substance is an absolute thing which is not subject of growing (an animal can grow, but there is not more substance of that animal as it grows, it is a single substance), so it must be an actuality, it can't be a potentiality. An illustration of this is that you can think of an ever growing sphere which keeps its sphere substance, but you can't think of an infinite sphere, because then it would be a boundless space without radius, so there wouldn't be a sphere at all. Form implies actuality and limits, and infinity implies potentiality and that there are no limits, so being and infinity are contradictory terms.

>>24732091
Yeah, that seems pretty accurate
>with modern math, as infinity is not defined as a number but as a limit
I remember somewhere in there Aristotle says that infinity itself is a limit. I think being being a limit has been sufficiently explained, and hopefully my statement makes sense here >>24731102

I'll post some more troubling quotes going forward along with this, again:
>>Metaphysics II.2, end of paragraph about formal cause, "so that one who is tracing the infinitely divisible line cannot be counting the possibilities of section."
Is he saying that although a line is infinitely divisible, it is only so in the abstract, so if one were to trace it, he wouldn't be tracing over a specific number of sections or something?
Maybe I should include the whole paragraph.

Is the Good also the form of forms for Plato?

Just chiming in to say I'm glad there's a thread about actual reading here. Even just for the sake of the mental exercise Aristotle is worth it, but also of course for the foundation of much of philosophy after.

>>24732627
>and hopefully my statement makes sense here
>Is that like saying the infinite simplicter cannot exist as a substance because it would be necessarily limited by the account of its essence?

I think so. Moreover, based on what I read on On the Soul, Aristotle seems to think that intellect (including human intellect) is potentially able to apprehend all the forms, and this apprehension implies that the intellect, which has no form by default, adopts the form of the apprehended concept. But, of course, it couldn't adopt the form of infinity, because it has no form, and this is something we can test internally when trying to think of infinity. So its lack of intelligibility is an additional sign (not a proof, though) that infinity can't be a substance.

However, I'm not as sure of this as with my previous post, I'm no expert in Aristotle, so take it with a grain of salt.

>>24733126
I am schizoid but I jerk off a lot to cartoons

>>24733126
Is there a color version of this I could put in a frame?

I tick the box for all of these except I'm always dying to fuck, even when I experience psychosomatic bouts of ED, which thankfully have nearly ceased after many years.

i also had a really mean and violent mother who used to tell me i wasn't her child, that some ugly fat redheaded family ended up with her pretty blonde girl, and she got stuck with their kid. she also used to get drunk and drive around and tell me she was going to crash into a tree to kill us both, lol. dad was loving, but an absent homeless drug addict who died of an OD.

diagnose me dude i can't afford healthcare

>>24733126
If you remove the "A", as long as Friend lacking means few and not none, you have the ideal human being, or at least, certainly infinitely better than any hypersocialized 21 century retard.

>>24733177
this nigga reading too much schopenhauer

my father's dragon.

File: 1739475354347689.jpg (105 KB, 900x900)

105 KB JPG

>>24733006
Wait till you get to prior analytics. dont feel bad, anon, it's a top 10 most difficult philosophy book to read for a reason
I think Gregory "Beast" Adler's videos on Organon/categories would be helpful for you.

File: txt.png (2 KB, 128x136)

2 KB PNG

that's the first aristotle work you should read. he intended it to be that way. its only difficult because its very systematic, just read slowly and take notes on a simple notepad. if you have any question just ask DeepSeek (better than chatgpt).

>>24733128
>DeepSeek (better than chatgpt).
@grok is this true?

It is very difficult, the retards are the ones who say books like this are easy because they aren’t reading carefully. Al-Farabi thought it was bragworthy that he understood the Analytics (he didn’t). They were not well understood until the 13th century, so yes they are quite hard. Honestly as much of an organon dork as I am you can skim prior an and topics (except the first book), post an is essential though. Even there you can safely skip those autism chapters where he works out all the ways an apodeixis can be wrong. Just remember that apodeixis is a scientific explanation with the middle as explanans not a “proof”.

>>24733006
im not sure if I would say difficult but I'm almost certain whatever the first book of the organon is is the slowest ive ever read in my life, and it also seemed like stuff that has just become common sense, maybe it was a big deal when it was first written down, or he was just writing it down so it would be impossible to forget but it seems superfluous for normal people

bump

>>24729544
She is right. One of the few honest women in this world

And yet, the same men that allow and encourage this behavior in women criticize them for it.

>>24729544
This is the third or fourth thread I've seen you make about this book, anon. Does it ever give you pause that you can only find the one book that argues this?
>oh no I'm simply starting discussion around
Right, yeah. This is the third or fourth thread.

>>24729544
>Life offers the human being two choices: animal existence - a lower order of life - and spiritual existence
How typical of a woman not to consider intellectual existence.
>After a few years of sporadic training, they revert to a state of irreversible mental torpor.
Dumb bitch got that right at least.

File: 91FX9ujG7GL._SL1500_[1].jpg (323 KB, 987x1500)

323 KB JPG

>>24733083
He save library

>>24733082
>The Cat Who Saved Books
he's just like me!

he also buried turds, like OP's post

>>24733082
well thanks for spoiling it you fucking dickhead

>>24733082
he clearly destroyed the one he's chewed a hole trhough and now wears as some sort of sick and twisted trophy. fuck this cat, dude. hell nah.

>>24729946
grindr
>>24732225
Wouldn't loose skin particles start to come off and accumulate on the glass?

>>24732240
Lame. I think I'd rather be single than worry so much about vanity. Any girl you attract because of vanity isnt a girl worth having

>>24729946
>A) do everything you can to get yourself into a tier I or II school
>B) live in new york city
>C) go to law school

>...so you're saying I should sacrifice my junior and senior year of HS to get into Penn or NYU...for the pussy??
Yes that's exactly what I am saying young anonling.


>>24730451
based. however, they seem to do this for me rather than me for them. I don't mind however. I'm just a little confused as to the why.

>dating app
Don't, its time has passed

I met my wife on /int/ in 2014 so you could try that

>>24729946
If you're in your 20s and haven't had sex or a gf just give up. I pretty much have.

>>24732869
I wasn't being anti-semetic, that's literally the meaning of the passage. Christians are essentially Jews who accept Christ as the Messiah and accept the New Covenant.


I fuckin' hate Jews, though, so you were close, I guess. Granted, that's sinful behavior on my part. A better Christian would feel pity and hurt for those who deny Christ and refuse his teaching, more than he would feel anger or hatred over what they get up to here in the world.

>>24732949
The passage wasn't denying Jews salvation either.. when you consider Matthew's audience was Jewish, you realize he's simply pleading for the naysayers to accept Christ. It's not at all a condemnation of Jews, but rather a plea..

>>24732949
>>24732953
world's most rational and self-aware anti-semite

>>24733023
It's what the fucking passage means, written by a supposed "jew" and speaking to supposed "jews".

>>24733158
>"jew"

because we don't share real lineage with the biblical israelites?? is that why you said 'supposed' and used quotation marks??

ANTI-SEMITE!

>>24732905
>11 hours
Damn.

>>24732905
Kys

Red Rising is just Code Geass in space

>>24732765
Based (except for le Guin)

>>24732250
Niggers have not changed in the last 10k years lol

File: mark-fisher-crop_14843914(...).jpg (16 KB, 550x371)

16 KB JPG

>>24732798
Yes, but this is in response to what Omni Man was stating as an echo and also a byproduct of PC writing in today's counterculture where people bash on capitalism and give it the runaround. When in reality it is Corporatism hiding under the veneer of capitalism that people should be paying attention to which is what picrel, an alien no less, is trying to say about us and our society.

Corporatism gets mistaken for Capitalism because it leverages the free market's framework—private property and competition—while distorting it with government intervention. This happens through subsidies, bailouts, or regulations that favor big players, creating a rigged system. People see the inequality and blame capitalism, not realizing the distortion stems from corporatist policies that prop up connected elites, not true market dynamics.

The confusion persists because corporatism thrives on opacity—governments and corporations collude to protect their interests, often under the guise of economic stability or job creation. This erodes the core of capitalism, which relies on fair competition and individual initiative. For instance, when regulations favor established firms over new entrants, innovation stalls, and wealth concentrates, fueling the perception of a "capitalist" failure. It’s a deliberate misrepresentation that shifts blame from systemic corruption to the market itself.

To make themselves heard, people should clearly distinguish corporatism from capitalism, emphasizing that the issue is government overreach and cronyism, not free markets. They could say: "We need to call out corporatism—government favoritism and rigged systems—not capitalism, which thrives on fair competition. Demand transparency and end subsidies that prop up elites!" Spreading this message through public forums, social media, or local discussions can amplify the call for reform.

>>24732826
Agreed.

File: libertarianism.jpg (118 KB, 1200x690)

118 KB JPG

>>24732739
>>24732502
>What are the evils of private property?
Private property of certain goods implies consequences shared by everyone in a given-group of people. For instance, if I own a factory and decide to pollute the environment and ruining the local river, these consequences will affect everyone around me. Private property in the current paradigm has largely mythified this notion that certain goods should be commercialized and CANNOT under any circumstances be subject to democracy or popular approval. This of course creates unwarranted consequences for the collective for the personal profit of the individual.

>>24732798
> [...] human nature has changed to accept "from each according to his ability to each according to need."
Not about socialism btw. Retards always spam this quote without understanding that it doesn't aim at describing socialism but communism. Marx even used it as an opposition to german socialists in the 19th century who were idealists in their political ambitions (critique of the gotha program).

>we're talking about the "true communism has never been tried" idiocy
Kinda true. Marx never made any program, he just analyzed reality and described phenomenons underlining capitalism/alienation. This is like saying that catholicism is false because Franco's Spain and Salazar's Portugal were shitholes.

>therefore should ignore the fact that every single time commies have tried to bring about their utopia the result is an unmitigated disaster of human misery and atrocities.
Even if we believe a black and white vision of socialist countries (very wrong imo but for the argument), you still have to account for all the "communist" policies which did work, stuff like social security, housing programs, mass education etc.


Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>24732476
Ironic because he's talking about corporatocracy not corporatism which is more related to fascism.

>>24732476
Atlas Shrugged
ps. op is gay

>>24731982
Ur mum’s ass lmao

>>24732738
Made out of matter, thus not destroyable.

>>24732630
>>24732978
(You) are autistic and need to ask your handlers to let you interact with people more

>>24730721
This would be my shelf if Jung books weren't so overpriced

>>24728027
Huh. Ok, noted. Thanks

>>24732660
Unlike seemingly everyone else in this thread, I have actually read the first two of his series and own all the rest besides the Age of Reason.
Yes, it is absolutely worth reading, he writes with excellent prose, and gives a detailed, lifelike picture of the cultures he writes about. While new advances in archeology and historical analysis have provided some evidence which contradict specific points here and there, on the whole it is still quite accurate historically speaking, especially considering its sheer scale. Also, while there have been advances in archeology and whatnot, much of the advances made in history specifically since the writing of these books have been historiographical or philosophical in nature, and thus don't necessarily disprove his work, just draw different conclusions from similar evidence. But yeah, definitely worth a read, the chapter on Crete in the Life of Greece and Egypt in Oriental Heritage were my favourite sections.

>>24732660
>read
idk but they're worth listening to
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLax23j-7EInW5aUHMjTqQ3uzs5rE0WP64

>>24732979
>And you know this how?
Because there is absolutely zero corroborating evidence of a Pharaoh ever doing this, ever. Herodotus’ tour would’ve been taking place nearly three thousand years AFTER Khufu lived. No one else, in history, Egyptian or otherwise, has ever corroborated the story. It’s patently false.
>”I will let the reader decide”
Lmao what a fucking cope. You can say this literally about anything. Napoleon was Polish, actually. No, I’m not lying, I’ll let the READER decide, haha!

>>24732660
I only read the Rousseau volume and thought it was great. I'm a big fan of his book The Lessons of History

It’s worth reading with the caveat that Duran often relies on primary sources without the skepticism of an historian. So there is a significant amount of nonsense in his work but it’s nonsense from primary sources, not his imagination

>>24731809
That picture makes it look as though the T-Rex:

a) wore Wellington boots
and
b) strode along cheerily

File: 71PirX6+i8L._UF1000,1000_QL80_.jpg (94 KB, 660x1000)

94 KB JPG

>>24731809
movie was better

>>24731809
The book was pretty good

Clearly the book needed more pointless tangents about (misunderstood) chaos theory

They did the lawyer dirty in the movie
He was awesome in the book
>>24732278
Nigguh, its a side parallel in the abstract explains not only WHY the whole venture went wrong but was inevitable because they were trying to control for too many factors at once.
C'mon Anon

>>24732845
Research the works of Ryuho Okawa and then come back when you've educated yourself. The jews are just the tip of the dutch iceberg, my friend.

He says liberals have a tendency to allow rights and citizenship privileges to dissenters and this is why they cause instability. His suggestion is that Liberals must draw a line around what is acceptable and unacceptable, that is not only defined in constitution but also emanating from majority opinion. He basically says if you have a citizen that is a dissenter, lock him up, censor him etc.
You know what I agree. Liberalism is based on the idea of freedom, fascists and commies don’t believe in freedom so it’s totally ok to eliminate them.

That does not solve political philosophy, it solves how realpolitik works, which is politology's domain.

>but political philosophy is about how realpolitik works

No, it isn't. Political philosophy is more about what ought to be done, whereas politology is more about what is done or has been done.

> If, as Strauss suggested, what Schmitt was really working towards was the notion that all value-setting as such is political, then there was little basis from which to criticize liberalism for moralizing political conflicts. Schmitt’s critique of liberalism depended on the possibility of keeping areas of the realm of values distinct from each other. But, as Strauss observed, this is impossible if all values can become political. Schmitt’s attempt in Concept of the Political to limit the intensity of political conflicts by keeping them distinct from moral issues is thus absurd.

BTFO’d by Strauss

>>24733021
That is a notable point. Strauss may not have completely btfo'd him but his criticisms were enough to cause Schmitt to amend his work with Strauss's commentary. Schmitt dug that hole for himself by recognizing certain types of classical liberal thinkers as being more politically pure and he also cited Marx which is basically a can of worms for him since Marx acknowledged almost any means even if it's just a nod towards a theoretically bankrupt option. Schmitt is forced to acknowledge his whole view of human nature is just tautolical for the work itself and in order to prove otherwise he would have to disprove his own work. Schmitt can always just revert to Nietzsche but if that's the case then he didn't contribute anything.

Strauss likely was the fully evolved and superior theorist.

File: Wesley Snipes eyes.gif (300 KB, 300x297)

300 KB GIF

>>24732779
I misread his post. I thought he meant "If my other works are badly reviewed, do I make a new account?"

>>24732498
I would say if you're going to use slop, use it to create a "vibe" rather than definitive characters, like the obscuring his face with shadows, make the surroundings more detailed as to not call too much attention to the design itself, etc.

File: ComfyUI_01132_.png (1.35 MB, 1024x1024)

1.35 MB PNG

>>24732868
am I vibeslopping?

>>24732583
You get banned for being off topic? Is this a new thing? I've never seen that happen on 4chan.

>>24732417
I wrote 5100 words today and damn if that last chapter wasn't the best one yet. I got so hyped writing it I had to get up and walk around to burn off nervous energy, and then once done I immediately re-read it.
Royal Road's going to fucking love it in February. (My backlog is too big)

In the future I have to make sure I don't backload all my hypest scenes.