Which book and/or excerpt is the literary peak of the English Bible (KJV)?
>>25187447Ecclesiastes
>>25187447>not reading it in greek pleb
>>25188027>he says, shewing his great folly; having not read it in Greek himself.
>>25188029I have read the new testament. Don't really care about the old
>>25187447The bible, published around 350 AD on paper, plagiarized the Enuma Elish that was inscribed on clay tablets 4000 years before your book. All the old testament is is a subverted book on jewish history.
Saturday EditionStubbed >>25180540>What is /wng/ — Web Novel General?A general for readers and authors involved or interested in the growing phenomenon of 'web novels', serialized English fiction posted to websites such as: Royal Road, Webnovel, Scribblehub, Wattpad, Archive of Our Own, Spacebattles, HFY, various personal author websites, and more>Why read web novels?Not for prose or tight editing or deep themes, frankly. As a whole, web novels are infamous for content sprawl and pacing issues. If you enjoy having millions of words to sink your teeth into to get to know the world and characters, though, you may be interested. Keeping up with other readers on a weekly basis to discuss the story's events unfolding is another perk, in the same way discussing an ongoing TV show might be.>Why write web novels?Ease of access & potential for Patreon earnings. Many successful authors gain an audience on their website of choice and funnel their readers into a Patreon. See graphtreon.com/top-patreon-creators/writing for an idea of what some are earning.Also, once an author has earned a fanbase, transitioning into an Amazon self-publishing career is several orders of magnitude easier than starting 'dry'.>/wng/ authors.Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>25188025>Which means it's not reproducibleNot at all and you repeatedly insisting otherwise is clear nonsense to anyone reading this conversation. It is not reproducible by bad writers. The process IS reproducible by good ones, as evidenced by authors who do exactly that.Very, very simple logic and it blows my mind you can't follow it.The pedantry on word choice is pointless anyway. Stop running with your tail between your legs and answer: if it was a 1 in 20,000 lottery system (luck) why do some of these top authors make fresh pen names and succeed repeatedly? Are they just God's chosen and unfathomably lucky?
>>25188040they leverage their old names for free advertising
>>25188044I have named ones who did not. Please follow the conversation.
>>25188048you didn't name a single one
>>25188050I mean I can't have a conversation with someone who just lies about what's sitting 10 posts up. So I guess that's that.
Which characters are the most obvious author self inserts?
>>25185440Who was Dosto's self-insert? Alexei Ivanovich?
>>25187509All the pedo characters
>>25187509Goryanchikov of course, but also Raskolnikov, Myshkin, Kirillov, and Smerdyakov. Alyosha is based on how he would've wanted his dead son to grow up.
Dante
most of the thomas mann novels have a selfinsert thats obviously himself, in buddenbrooks its the little kid that plays the piano, death in venice and in magic mountain the maincharacters
Karl Ove Knausgård's father is the most terrifying villain in all literature. Judge Holden is a bitch compared to him.
>>25182106>>25182132The fuck is wrong with boomers?
>>25182151kek
>>25186479They grew up during the war and couldn't shake the mindset
>>25186321Had my nan over for dinner for her 80th birthday last Saturday, and after eating we got onto the topic of my family (as in her dead ex-husband's family, as in those who share my surname -- for added context, I'm the only male of my generation of this brood ie the only person who can possibly continue the line (I argued that my sister & cousins have the same the same blood but she was like "yeah, but yeah nah...")) and she started reminiscing on my great uncle...So basically I my pater-paternal ancestry is convict stock and my great uncle (whom I never met, for better or worse) spent his last few years with a growing cancerous sore on his face that he didn't care to have attended to by doctors (keep in mind I'm not American so there is no financial barrier to such treatment). Apparently all he did was get on the beers daily until he eventually perished, making his wife/daughter look after him and bring his drinks to him. And supposedly this sore STANK -- like real badly.My mother (and keep in mind this is my paternal grandmother I'm talking about, and also my parents are divorced, and also my mother is Swedish so there's a lingering cultural barrier, though in fairness after 35+ years it's been degraded somewhat) sitting across from the table from her was in full agreement that this was horrible behaviour from a horrible man. My first thought was "Hey, that sounds like Philoctetes!" to which I then gave them a lesson on tertiary Trojan cycle myth.My second thought was "It sounds a lot like my grandfather, actually; and a bit like my father...and me... [takes a sip of my wine]" I brought up the fact that I could empathise with the sorry old cunt, if only a bit, but I got chewed out for it... I empathise with both sides, to be honest...
>>25186321Based
prev: >>25180916
>>25187966I've stepped into the Mississippi River multiple times. It wasn't a different river. I checked the map.
>>25187980Yes but each time that you did yoi partook of motion and time while doing it which is all that Heraclitus was saying.
>>25185601If one self publishes a book and an LLM gobbles it up in training, does this gove immortality to the author?Their discourse self published or not strengthened the semantic neural net of words in its programming. Its like a manifestation engine
I'm gonna bus to the library to read Pynchon's Shadow Ticket for an hour or so if anyone wants to join me or come up and say hi :D
I feel like Dr Seuss must have had the easiest job in the world. He’s like ‘this is the fucking Newsler. And you know what he does?! He LIES’
This is all you need.
>>25188031Why is ASZ the only Nietzsche these people swarm to?
here's your uncle ted, bro: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YlkCdSRuWQ&t=507s
This might be the last Aristotle topic that is still vexing to me, but how exactly does the Unmoved Mover work as a first final cause and/or a first efficient cause? So, I get that the final cause has to be prior to the efficient cause. But is the Unmoved Mover an efficient cause of anything? My problem is that in Metaphysics Lambda, the Unmoved Mover is not described as an efficient cause, but only as a final cause. Aristotle also affirms in Lambda that motion has to be eternal (IIRC comes from Physics VIII), which seems to imply that the universe has an infinite chain of efficient causes. So, you get this picture of there being two eternal principles: the Unmoved Mover, and the cosmos in motion. However, in Metaphysics Little Alpha, 994a, Aristotle argues precisely against the idea that you can have an infinite chain of even efficient causes. So, it seems like the idea that there are two coexisting eternal principles idea is wrong, since the cosmos cannot be the infinite chain of eternal causes that it appears to be. However, Aristotle does not fix the problem and call the Unmoved Mover an efficient cause at any point whatsoever. I am not sure how to rectify this. Any thoughts? I think the idea might be that "eternal things can be infinite sources, and since motion is eternal, there can be infinite efficient causes in a temporal sense", but this might be a copout.
>>25187251Also, so I can make the case perfectly clear, the Unmoved Mover does not need any explanation that refers to efficient causes, since it always was and never had potentiality. But everything else is fair game for the question "What is its efficient cause?". One could say that the cosmos as a whole never needed an efficient cause as its constituent elements were always there. But matter isn't a substance, and the individual substances of a cosmos would all have potentiality and thus need an explanation of efficient cause (which we could posit to both be infinite and eternal without contradiction, especially since the system as a whole is eternal). We would have essentially broken down Aristotle's cosmos into a part with pure act, the Unmoved Mover which does not efficiently cause anything, and a part that allows for potentiality, which has infinite efficient causes, both which are eternal but where the enmattered cosmos is necessarily subordinated to the Unmoved Mover for its final cause.
>>25186065Individuation is difference.
>>25187889Difference is act which is form. But there is the famous passage you are thinking of in which he says two individuals (Callias and Socrates) are one in form and two in matter. The problem with your reading is that it is Platonic - there is an actual form or idea common to the two individuals, and difference is due to matter on an ontological level. (This would be drawing on unwritten teachings of course). But one of Aristotle's main theses is that there is no such common 'something' to individuals. Also, Aristotle says in several places, including in that same book, that individuals have their own particular form. How is it individuated by matter if it is also individuated by its form? The problem here is the systematic ambiguity of Aristotle's language. Form can refer to the intelligibility of a thing, which really is common to multiple individuals but is not any separate entity, and really is individuated by 'matter'. These two hammers have the same form and different matters. But can also refer to a thing's actuality, which is particular. You can find abundant instances of both throughout the corpus. This is the only way to make sense of all of the apparently contradictory things Aristotle says about these issues and it is also philosophically sound. Your reading turns into the view the Metaphysics is aimed at overthrowing.
>>25187914>How is it individuated by matter if it is also individuated by its form? The problem here is the systematic ambiguity of Aristotle's language. Form can refer to the intelligibility of a thing, which really is common to multiple individuals but is not any separate entity, and really is individuated by 'matter'. These two hammers have the same form and different matters. But can also refer to a thing's actuality, which is particular. You can find abundant instances of both throughout the corpus.put this shit on a wall and frame itnow the only thing left is to figure out the extent to which intelligibility and actuality are in common and to the extent which they depart.
>>25187981>now the only thing left is to figure out the extent to which intelligibility and actuality are in common and to the extent which they depart.There can't really be a question of 'extent' here I think. For Aristotle there's doxa and episteme and there can't be a middle term between them because the individual and the universal are immediate contraries. In Post An he talks about how the noesis of principles has to be immediate, though you can trace out the psychological process of course. If I play softball and learn about the game I have a universal concept of it but how could I relate that universal concept to the individual moments of the game I played, the actual field I was in, etc? I can't, besides to repeatedly refer the individual to the universal; they remain apart. So it is certainly true that x particular IS y universal, but particularity and universality can't overlap with each other. In any particular instance you could speak of individuals 'departing' from the universal because of defects or whatever, but even here it's not like the defective individual has 'less' of the universal or participates in it 'less'. Qua particular it was already infinitely removed from the abstract universal. On the other hand, all of these individuals, which are not knowable per se, are being created by an individual intellect, but not a composite intellect containing distinct thoughts.
Most of Marx's writings are either economic books, critiques of Hegelian thought, or historical analysis. He never left a coherent epistemology or metaphysics, and never really developed an ontology. His only philosophical work that I know of are the Manuscripts of 1844, but they remains very poor in their philosophical content. So why is he considered as one of the major thinkers of philosophy when his thought was as complex and philosophically rich as Montesquieu's thought was ?>dialectical and historical materialismMarx used a hegelian method to analyze history and society, but, apart from the German Ideology, he never really developed it. Even then, he doesn't really present a big and structured account for his philosophical thought but rather relies on a philosophical critique and historical presentation.
>>25187685I don't know what "doesn't work" means here. Any common sense supply-and-demand law suggests that if labor outweighed value, and item would not be produced, and that if value outweighed labor it couldn't do so for very long due to market tendency toward equilibrium. Especially today when arbitrage happens in a fraction of a second down to a fraction of a cent.
>>25187799Economics is a sociological study. If it can't define basic concepts like value or money, then it is worthless.No, I don't. That's the entire premise of Marxist in contrast to bourgeois liberalism. Liberalism says that society arose from individuals whereas Marxism posits that the human individual, especially the modernist individual, is a product of society. This is the exact opposite of social compact theory. Marxism positions that production is a synergy between labor (transformation by man's hand) and nature (transformation by other than man, e.g. weather and so on). The idea that a specific man does his person labor, is a misconception. Marx makes it quite clear that labor theory of value has zero to do with individual labor. Zero. It is a measure of a society's labor. An individual does not have his private labor, he works in the context of a society comprised, in Burke's words, of the living, the dead and the unborn. His very language and identity and skills and tools are derived from incalculable labor by his fellow men toiling everywhere and in every time. Markets appraise values, individuals don't. Markets appraise values based on LTV, that is energy in human labor the good or service requires. In proportion to other goods, that is exchange value.
>>25185562The foundation of irreligious criticism is: Man makes religion, religion does not make man. Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again. But man is no abstract being squatting outside the world. Man is the world of man – state, society. This state and this society produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopaedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d’honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion.Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.Criticism has plucked the imaginary flowers on the chain not in order that man shall continue to bear that chain without fantasy or consolation, but so that he shall throw off the chain and pluck the living flower. The criticism of religion disillusions man, so that he will think, act, and fashion his reality like a man who has discarded his illusions and regained his senses, so that he will move around himself as his own true Sun. Religion is only the illusory Sun which revolves around man as long as he does not revolve around himself.
>>25185687Slave morality.
>>25187931While I agree with Marx here, the problem is that there is little if no “real happiness” in the world as he puts it, and the promise of the revolution to destroy oppression and increase real happiness is contingent upon…well, the revolution actually succeeding in its goals. Socialist nations are not that well-off in terms of any sociological happiness index compared to capitalistic nations (and no, don’t bring up Scandinavia, they are a bunch of pseudo-religious Lutheran socialist larpers who had a collective society long before Marx). This means that in the foreseeable future there is no socialist ending of oppression, of ending of “”the sigh of the oppressed creature”. Looking at how long aristocratic and feudal systems had their grip on human society, it is possible that the current system will endure until 3000 AD when someone will finally bring global socialism.What, then? I have ~80 years to live on this world where suffering is guaranteed to not be solved by socialism in my lifetime, and I must live. I am then forced to not look at this world for happiness, but to look beyond it, to religion, and to forsake the world as having fallen from grace. Marx was optimistic that the global socialist revolution would happen soon after his death. He was wrong.
>Genesis was a snore fest of lineages that I didn't bother to remember(This begot that guy, that guy begot him, him begot he, no one in-between has any relevance to the plot so you could've just skipped them and said that he was a descendant of this guy)>It still had enough edge/grit/tension to keep me reading through it>Start Exodus, know that there were alot of adaptations and homages to it so maybe this one is better>The entire first act is just a cycle of Pharoah refusing to let 'em go, then a plague comes, then he let's them go before saying 'SIKE!'>The rest of the book is a tent building guideYeah, I think I understand why even the fans don't even read ts
>>25186418Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled. 16They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.
>>25187935The quote in Genesis said that God had Adam name all the animals and could not find for him a “helper” among them so in the next page he creates Eve. You do the math.
>>25187957i never knew helper meant bodyguard https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKDbsFfly1k thats really interesting prooftext for Christfurries
>>25187967Well, Eve was created as sexual companion to Adam so what would you referring Adam was looking for in the animals when he was naming them?
>>25178804You didn't even get to the part where Moses orders the Israelites to genocide the Midianites and take the virgin girls as sex slaves
I'm 50 pages in. Is this book actually a difficult read like redditors say or does Cormac just obfuscate his descriptions of land in poetic runon sentences to make you feel overwhelmed?
>>25186574most cringe post I've seen all day
>>25185166I listened to it as an audio book and its one of my favorite pieces of media ever created
>>25185166Its called flow, but yes. I don't mind learning what a bivouac is myself even if it's just thrown in for archaic effect
>>25186938Crazy how there are many 20 year old weeb zoomers out there, who consider One Piece to be the supreme achievement in humanity, who unironically have this sentiment after having listened to BM on jewtube
>>25185166it’s garbage and written like shit, it’s only talked about because of The Judge and how brutal some of the stuff in it is, everything else is poorly paced shit
>>25185985this is one is almost 400 pages
>>25185985Probably Hypersphere. The PDF comes in at 738 pages. Behind that probably the OG Legacy of Totalitarianism in a Tundra.https://lit.trainroll.xyz/wiki/Collaborative_Works>>25185999Sure, but plays aren't dense at all.
>>25186193Coronameron is 700 pp. too
>>25187292Ah I was only looking at the first volume.
>>25185982I enjoyed the play about Dugin
But if you think the writing is extremely amateur then are you implying you could do better? That you can actually write something that entertains a lot of people? Can you really, amateur?
>>25180878>if you think the writing is extremely amateur then are you implying you could do better?no, you fucking retard
>>25180878There’s thousands of better books out there that have gotten less attention, sales, so yes
Right, my dad just rang me and he doesn’t read or anything but he wants to go and see the movie for something to pass the time and he’s inviting me, do I go?
>>25188008You only have so much time with your dad left...
>>25188012Even if the movie sucks (very likely) it will be fun to get out I guess. I’ll go. I’ll tell you fags what I thought of it.
ITT we post hidden gems
Are there any good essats or books that push strong arguments and reasons as to why traditional gender roles are superior to the modern version of womens roles and womens liberation?Stay at home mom = strong children =strong community=happy and healthy peoplesMother raising kids> the state raising kidsPerhaps even some writings that breakdown the mind of people that seem to be so bothered by these ideas
>>25187089>I just read through your other posts in the thread and you're basedThanks :)>their horrid mistreatment of women.Yeah. Niggers are too fucking retarded to debate anything and so they beat anyone who disagrees with them.Tradition ends up limiting them because some extremely strong nigger once decided he created the best system ever, and every beta male feared him too much to disagree. They feared him so much that they instill that fear in their children too. "Woah, you can't eat pork, the scary strong jew will beat you up! He really hates pork." "Woah, don't eat cows, the scary jeet will beat you up! He really loves cows!" "Woah, you have to elongate the women's neck, the scary nigger loves women with long necks!"Beating up women is the first and main symptom of a society that can't articulate the reasons behind their system. That system will always fail, because it's inherently irrational.>>25187323>woke feminists love brown muslims , even after you explain to them muslims "opress women"
>>25185412>globalized industrial farming was never criticized chud!!>also fuck capitalism!! Hail MarxKek
>>25187840Who cares if Marx criticized it? He's an idiot. A schizophrenic idiot at that.
>>25185343>the state raising kidswould actually be better. What you have instead are overworked moms that can barely afford daycare and are often single, isolating their kids from society. State-run daycares and camps and whatnot would help kids engage in social activities.Stay-at-home mom means both mom and dad are affluent enough that one of them doesn’t work, which even in third-world countries isn’t true if one goes by western notions of “not contributing any significant taxable income to the household”: women who are nominally “housewives” will still spend a significant fraction of their time working for income in their free time. Go to villages in third-world countries where your supposed gender roles are upheld. Kids are raised by the community, women work in vegetable gardens, household animals and sewing to sell the produce/clothing, and often men and women will cook and/or clean together since if you’re working class, you cannot risk having one gender overworking themselves and getting sick/injured. These communities have joint families (several generations under one roof) in order to ensure that these things are upheld smoothly; your emphasis on gender roles in a western nuclear family setting within a suburban environment and individualistic culture where you don’t even know your neighbour’s name is entirely alien to them.
>>25188005>what we really need to do is give the pedophiles who run this country even MORE access to our children Brilliant.
is he retarded?https://www.youtube.com/@WriteConscious
>>25183365Very homosexual physiognomy
>>25184889An aureus for a good servus
>>25183378>before I turned>my phone back on>and took you to where>I buried hundreds of crystalsThe first three lines here flow well and then he just fucks it up with the fourth, is this the power of free verse?
>>25183365He's one of the good guys no matter what you think of his presentation style.
>>25183376>And the Dull Machete for lamest kill goes to... Tennessee Williams>How do you choke on an eyedrop bottle cap?
