/lit/ - Literature

>>14281580
>"OP is right"
>types exactly like OP

>you know what sucks about science is they expect me to learn math and a bunch of gay shit like dynamics and mechanics in order to understand it, like just tell me what quantum field theory can do for ME in two pages or less

That recent Harold Bloom interview where he's 900 years old really hit me some place deep. That motherfucker would probably do anything, absolutely anything, for another year with the energy and the time that I have right now, that I'm squandering playing a fucking stupid video game or watching garbage Youtube videos.

Why do we perceive time's passage as a series of "mulligans" when we're young? Why do I instinctively feel like I'll "do better tomorrow," or a month from now, or next year? That's what I fucking said last year, and the year after that. What the hell am I doing? Every moment I am wasting is a moment I could have been climbing higher up the mountain of wisdom and seeing something truly worth living for.

>tfw you study mystical and semi-mystical ontology and metaphysics and also physics and chemistry and astronomy, and have a vague but pervasive suspicion that scientistic materialism is not a valid or necessary "default" stance to take, and that there is nothing inherently implausible or unusual about crazy-ass ideas like idealism, nous having metaphysical reality, teleology or even eschatology or conscious design, etc., etc., and that denying things like the anthropic principle in order to "suspend judgment" about reality is ironically assuming (judging) that our local reality behaves according to what our tiny minds have observed and tend to conceive as stochastic and mechanistic
>tfw mixing several philosophers' and quacks' ideas about epistemological "openness" together to achieve a holistic practice of denaturing, loosening, disentangling, and/or unweaving assumptions and categories of thought, prying concepts and accreted empirical assumptions back and widening or deforming the field on which they interact with one another
>tfw it's too built on your own weird semi-ascetic semi-autistic experiences of playing with similar ideas to really reduce it to a simple formula or method and describe it, let alone recommend it to others
>tfw you wish you could, because the result is something like a warm fuzzy deistic faith, mixed with intentional theosophy, underpinned by sufficient rigour that you aren't stupid enough to go "CLEARLY SCHUON HAD ALL THE ANSWERS!!!" or "CLEARLY CHRISTIANITY SUB-BRANCH 8B-X-P4(B) IS THE FINAL ONE" or even "WE HAVEN'T OBSERVED ANY CARTOONISH NOTIONS OF MIRACLE OR MAGIC, THEREFORE NOTHING ABOUT REALITY IS MIRACULOUS OR INTENTIONAL OR SPIRITUAL"