Can there be a separate /phi/ board so you can contain these autists, philosophy is gay and no one cares about it at parties or most social outlets
baited nobody award
>>24189422No. You will read The Republic and you will like it
How to approach literary criticism and or theory?
>>24189289>The pasta water brittle of peopleDo you just say things and hope they sound clever?
>>24189270From the Greeks? It is mostly some bit and prices od Plato and Aristotle, Georgias, Horace. They are not very useful on their own but fairly important to the field and form its foundation. Just grab a copy of Norton, used first edition can be had for $10, it is a good book to have a copy of.
Just read all of Lacan.
What are the preconditions and what post conditions are you looking for
>>24189320In terms of what, exactly?
particularly those that took place in industrialized economies like the IRA or ETA. not really interested in opposition to far-flung colonial projects like Afghanistan or Vietnam etc
>>24188610Vietnam had been converted into a rural wage labour society by the French. You just want bullshit Foqo. I am not going to recommend books on urban terrain until you can articulate how and with what methods the VWP and EZLN succeeded.
>>24188818Beg your pardon?
>>24188818Smarmy internet commies are the bane of my existence
Here's a project I've been working on a bit. It's playlists of booktubers and other assorted videos. There are currently 30 playlists. For the four primary playlists, which are shown in the image, there's one video per person. I don't know what my plans are for the channel, so let me know how you think it could be improved. https://www.youtube.com/@Booktuber.PlaylistsYoutube is a mess with their playlists, so you can look here for an overview. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQ5WZPWee7hqcauT_oGrGFiLZ09QaJQ_MgGZg2HjwFuc1WaZsE50_UCU2uHCB-1jsu_0AMRRhPOzQOF/pubhtml#
>>24183312It's not going to happen.
>>24183352Whether or not you're good, it's definitely the case that you're obscure.
It'd be simple to keep this thread going for months at this rate, but I don't think I can be bothered. I'll probably let it die after a week more at most.
>>24166853thanks
>>24188838np, yw.
What am I in for?
There is no need for you to sacrifice yourself any longer
>>24182019Go ahead. I read it a second time some months ago. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.
>>24172699>What am I in for?
>>24188421It's beautiful.
>>24186890NAYRT but what are your own ideas about it? I basically can't make sense of most of what happens, I can tell there's a shit ton going on under the surface but all I can figure out is Dracula has something to do with it and (unsurprisingly in a Wolfe novel) the narrator isn't what he says he is.
Has anyone else gotten into these? The later hindu stuff is cool but can get really sectarian and dogmatic. Even the non-samhita parts of the veda seem to have been filtered through brahmins who had a vested interest in reframing a lot of what the samhitas said through the lens of "pay us lots of money and cows."In the same way the Saman and the Yajus are both really brahminic reimaginings of Ric material, but the Rigveda itself is really uniquely pious imo even though you can kind of tell that each book is sort of like a portfolio for the family that wrote it.Angiras himself is a really mysterious character that I can't find much scholarly or even religious literature about
>>24188311Not yet.
>>24188311I think for this you need to move from commercial books who always talk about the same things, to phd theses and academic articles using https://libgen.li/ and wikipedia bibliography for a starting point.
Are they obsolete or still relevant?
>>24182960yes
>>24183986what books have you read that Marx wrote?
>>24182960Lacan is more relevant than both of them.
>>24183953The essay where Marx defends the right of Jews to full civil and political emancipation alongside all other German citizens. Excellent recommendation of 1840s political literature anon.>>24184311Mao was not some ur-Marxist. He was influenced by it and the Chinese revolution had natural points of contact with Marxism (because all social-revolutionary utopias have some common features with it), but he had views that were in some ways the opposite of classical Marxism. Most importantly his belief in all-powerful subjective forces which could move mountains and things like that. His own knowledge of Marxist theory seems to have almost entirely come from the Short Course which was an edited Stalinist work from the Soviet Union. BTW, some important works by Marx and Engels weren't even published when Mao was rising up as the leader of the Chinese communists.The idea that Marxism today is doing exactly what Mao did in the 1950s is not a scientific way of thinking nor would it be dealing with material reality. Also Marxism politically went in different directions more than 100 years ago. Before the Bolsheviks took power in Russia, the Marxists were not as radical as you think. The anarchists more so, and they were quite strong in labor movements. The German socialists who actually knew Marx and Engels, like Kautsky and Bernstein, were relatively moderate figures compared to Lenin, who had a very militaristic approach, and his main contribution was an organizational structure for militarized Marxist-Leninist vanguard parties. Those had a big effect in left-wing revolutions in the 20th century.>>24187126Yeah people are "like what about the Chinese stock market" but is anyone here investing in the Chinese stock market?
Marx's premise was correct but the conclusions he drew were incorrect>t. read the manifesto only
There was book posted here it had lemurs on the covers and it maybe had lemurs in it's title but I'm not sure. It was some kind of schizo book written by 4chan poster if I remember well. Can you tell me what it's called?
>>24188364this
>>24188364yes that's it
>>24188414Read it for free at https://files.catbox.moe/tssf7s.zip
>>24188364indie classic!
>>24188359Anna’s Archivehttps://annas-archive.org/md5/685daf3676340a15d235be4febe8f054
How did the "is-ought gap" ever get any traction among people who aren't moral anti-realists?If there are facts about what is truly better or worse in some situations (and there is a very strong case for this), and reason tells us about facts, then reason tells us what is better or worse.Fact statements like:>Your hair is on fire!>You're hurting her.>You're investing in a company that is about to announce bankruptcy.>If you keep doing that you're going to break it.>Etc.All *imply* certain actions as responses.How does Hume get away with it without implicitly presupposing a sort of anti-realism? He seems to assume that desire is irrational off the bat, but this itself seems to presuppose that there is no fact of the matter as to which desires are truly choiceworthy.Plus, older philosophers all thought reason/the rational part of the soul had its own desires, the desire to know truth ("all men by nature desire to know" - Aristotle). The intellect is attracted to Truth, the will to the Good, and then Beauty relates to both Will and Intellect. Here, we seem to have the will being attracted to a sort of arbitrary plurality of goods, and intellect attracted to nothing.Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>24188492Based ancients.
>>24188919>guy believes that trauma exists but won't entertain an afterlife becahse he just wants to plug himself into a pleasure machine.I shiggy diggy
>>24188469You're misunderstanding Hume's is-ought distinction, funnily enough, because of the is-ought distinction. Hume's gap is simply identifying a rule, rather than implying any follow-up.The point is not to ask "how do you know raping and torturing is bad" in a mocking way, just a curious one.You made clear "how you know" here:>>24188549>there is a FACT that burning alive is badthis proves, rather than disproves, the distinction because you're making clear what Hume argued was too often implicitly assumed. We can write out the chain of reasoning, assuming for the sake of brevity that it is guaranteed that to pour lead into children's cereal will kill the children.1. Killing children is bad2. Pouring lead into children's cereal kills themConclusion: you should/ought not pour lead in children's cereal.Remember not to ignore the also implicit (3): you should not do bad things - which is more of a definition, but is of course necessary for the chain of logic to be valid.The point isn't to disregard (1) and (3), the point is simply to point out that they are being assumed. That doesn't lead to a "ha! prove that I shouldn't rape beyond 'you shouldn't'", the point is simply that if you're making categorical imperatives such as "you should not rape", i.e., "rape is bad", they are part of your chain of reasoning. It is really the moral argument that "clarity is good" that allows me to say "you should therefore include it as a part of your chain of reasoning."
>>24189095These is-ought chains are how we form all suggestions.>You are raping>Raping is bad>You should stop raping.>You are pillaging.>Pillaging is bad.>You should stop pillaging.Without the moral contributions, "you should stop" does not follow from "you are pillaging"You could argue that the nature of pillaging or raping makes it necessarily bad and so "you are pillaging" always necessarily concludes with "you should stop pillaging" because pillaging definitionally is always something you should not do: the ought is contained in the is - but this doesn't seem to be your argument so far.Instead you say things like "there seems to be a very obvious empirical case". The point isn't whether it's obvious, the point is whether you have a "case" in the first place. What is your empirical case - once you flesh it out, Hume's argument is it will contain some moral facts in it: "x is bad, y is bad, z is bad". Again, it's not "refusing to accept these and asking 'why'" it's asking why to completely clarify your chain of reasoning.Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>24188929>Why should I not condemn a political discourse advocating for the murdering of a class or anyone who might be helping the interests of that classWere you the anon that wanted to shoot commies in the head?
Religions, Gods, and Faith EditionWelcome to /wbg/, the official thread for the discussion and development of fictional worlds and settings.Here is where you can share the details of your created worlds such as lore, factions, magic systems, ecosystems and more. You can also post maps for your settings, as well as any relevant art, either created by you or used as inspiration for your work. Please remember that dialogue is what keeps the thread alive, so don't be afraid of giving someone feedback!FAQ:>What is worldbuilding?Worldbuilding is the process of creating entire fictional worlds from scratch, all while considering the logistics of these worlds to make them as believable as possible. Worldbuilding asks questions about the setting of a world, and then answers them, often in great detail. Most people use it as a means of creating a setting or the scenery for a story.>"Isn't there a Worldbuilding general in >>>/tg/ already?"Yes, there is. However, that general is focused on the creation of fictional worlds for the intended purpose of playing TTRPG campaigns. Here you can discuss worldbuilding projects that are not meant to be used for a roleplaying setting, but for novels, videogames, or any other kind of creative project.>"Can I discuss the setting of my campaign here, though?"If you want to, but it would probably be better to discuss it on >>>/tg/ . We don't allow the discussion of TTRPG mechanics, however. If you want to discuss stats or which D&D edition is best, this is not the place.>"Can I talk about an existing fictional setting that is not mine?"Yes, of course you can!>"Does worldbuilding need to be about fantasy and elves?"Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>24186969What would you do instead then?
>>24174883Sounds cool
Bump.
I have no clue how to worldbuild properly. My ideas so far:Society is surrounded my 4 massive walls. No one is behind them and all but 2 people don't care to know. The society is atheist leaning where the people largely don't care senior about the concept of God or religion enough to make any churches.The "world" is roughly the size of Spain, it's stuck in a 1940esque technology.Is there anything I should know about land masses and how to create them?
>>24172843Hope everyone is having a great Valentine's Day! What should one consider when designing a goddess of love (especially in terms of other domains that go well with Love besides the blatantly obvious) and/or her church?
SANDERKEKS WE’RE SO DONE FOR
>>24189179The first book would be a kino tv show but they'd probably fuck it up like Rings of Power and Wheel of Time. The whole light eyes/dark eyes thing is already heavy handed enough in the book lol
>GRRRR existence will never make sense or have meaning but instead of surrendering to this despair and killing myself I will REVOLT!Revolt against whom? Libro is revolting against abstract concepts.
>>24187222This. The modern skeptics, agnostics, atheists—they are at the very least just as guilty of dogmatism and question begging as the classical tradition. Man as the sui generis source of all meaning, reason, logic, beauty, and truth is a pretty extreme leap. It's pretty clear that we're surrounded by meaning, quiddity, beauty, etc. Does this just spring from the aether uncaused? If philosophy is the love of wisdom, is it wise to take all of experience as somehow illusory?The idea of a Logos that transcends man is at least as plausible as man as the creator of all reason (I'd say much more).But I think a key thing to realize is that this sort of existentialism is essentially the religion of a decent segment of the academy. They *need* the world to be meaningless and valueless in order for them to be Camusian and Nietzschean overcomers, instead of just deluded and vice addled. So, they protect this like any religious dogma, hence attempts to secure reductive corpuscular physicalism as the "default" view, even though it isn't at all popular in physics itself. This sort of 19th century metaphysics is particularly helpful for demonstrating how meaning and freedom, or quiddity, are all "illusory" and valueless.
>>24186037If he isn't interesting or insightful that would make him appropriate for the LCD, wouldn't it?
>>24185991camus is not about a metaphysical revolt.his project is basically make rationality great again. he criticize the absurd for the paralization it creates in the human psyche. he dont believe in the metaphysical at all. he see a problem and try to tap it. he understand the notion of absurd is a cancer to the human mind. but he really dont have no real response except, just ignore it and trust your capacity of thinking.
>>24185991I saw this thread and thought to mention that his conception of the metaphysical revolt is explicitly based on permanent revolution from Marxist theory (he's literally like "this but for metaphysics instead of politics") but then I asked ChatGPT and it was 100% sure he never used that term so I literally had to get home to check and it's right fucking there spelled out. Felt so gaslighted man.But yeah anyway not big into Marxist shit so maybe some commieanons can explain wth he meant by it.
>>24188106it's about both
Fun detective novels? I've read Inherent Vice and watched some old detective movies
>>24188941Animal Farm. The old proletariat is worked to death and sent to a glue factory. It is an allegory about Victorian English.
Murder on the Orient Express
>>24186369>Fun detective novels?Naked Lunch
>>24186369I enjoyed the LA quartet although the plots can get pretty overwrought
post your work.either>write a story based on this imageor>copy/paste your most recently written excerptor>copy/paste a favorite of your excerptsor>just write whateverread others, share feedback, etc.
>>24179268no
The website hosted a variety of miscreants and outcasts united not so much by a common goal as by the lack of one, various subgroups bubbling up onto the surface once in a while only to pop and disperse back into the dirty water, subsumed by the steady tide and back to square one to repackage personal grievances into cultural trends with the occasional use of antropomorphic personification in the form of a depressed amphibian, drooping eyelids never seeing more than the half of it, feeling cheated out of any semblance of a genuine life in which real life conversations would balance out the unceasing internal monologue. Pop.
>>24188934Sounds like my definition of Hell.
Time to Behave and Time to Get Gone'Do you get all I'm sayin' about college, it's good, especially the eating, smoking..' - 'Hun, you don't eat a thing. Except when ya drunk.' - 'We'll eat together tonight, babe, wear that collared shirt. Nana wants to hear about your apprenticeship.'Janine's bad streak from when we were going together as sophomores dissolved sometime, and I hadn't picked up on when. It's just clear as day. She's a woman; on top of her plans, and absent are those precious whims. No more pestering me, prodding at my torso, escorting me by the arm. Prying with that smug bunny face. Assured always of my attention, in spite of the fact that there's so little to attend to, to talk about. Boredom has informed everything we do. Until now. Now, I'm confident there are a million things we're supposed to do. I don't know what I'm supposed to do. How is it that she seems to know what she should do?Holding hands is second nature, we still do it. We move as one. Janine's folks are really nice. They knew she was high on things when she'd come home at sixteen. They were ashamed, and confused, and would do anything for her. She must have felt guilt, once she knew they knew. She shook off teen angst. We still talk all about underground music though. Mitch from drug store let's Janine dress that way too, like a sexy punk. It smells like leaves, my cheeks suddenly flush and hot as the other tell. It's a kind of sentence when the evidence of summer's penetrability rears it's head. You think sometimes you can get September in the bag no problem. No, it's not summer, it's nippy. 'Nana smells the same as you.' - 'I wear Youth-Dew.' - 'Darlene wears it, Anne-Michelle wears it.' - 'I thought it was your smell though, like roses and pee...' 'Your rock and roll smell.?' - 'What should I smell like?' - 'Nevermind.''Nevermind the coney. I'm gonna save myself, sweetheart.' 'Let's get you some coffee, ah?' She lurches to my bosom, I bow. There's those lips. Life's damn good.
>>24189364 is me>I'm just trying out prose here once more. Still new to writing. >Would love any who have read it to rate the readability out of /10 or /5 or whatevs. >And do ruthlessly criticize!<3
Since it's pretty clear the Asoiaf series will never be finished, how do you think it would have been finished if GRRM wasn't lazy?
I doubt it's a matter of laziness. He probably tried a lot but just can't get a satisfying result
>>24189298It's not like he's had any other major literary projects in the last decade.
The show but better
>>24189342Basically this.In particular I just know they would have stopped the Others with some meme gimmick, Dany would have turned evil, and Bran would have become king.One of the reasons I feel like the books have ground to a halt is that he saw how much people hated the show's ending, which was more or less the framework of his preferred ending, and it spooked him. He's been trying and failing to come up with something else ever since, but he can't do it without shredding everything he's written up to this point. So he's stuck.
>>24189277>Since it's pretty clear the Asoiaf series will never be finished, how do you think it would have been finished if GRRM wasn't lazy?General offensive / General uprising by the PAVN / PLAF respectively, liberating Westeros for the Peasant and Worker. HO HO HO CHI MINH BWB IS GOING TO WIN