/lit/ - Literature

>>21381584
https://faulkner.drupal.shanti.virginia.edu/characters

here you go anon

>>15048403
intentions only exist within human beings. without human beings or other higher intelligences, intentions can't exist so the question "why are we here" is meaningless as there couldn't have been a "why" before we were.

How to become a public intellectual? Is being in academia a must?

>"A couple of some [...]"

Between us.

"Y'all" is a perfectly reasonable addition to the English language; you are letting your prejudice against Southerners get in the way of adopting sensible linguistic changes.

>But you can't know for sure...
>We can't ever REALLY know
>How do you know if it's real tho...?
>You can't truly know anything...
How tf do you have any debate when there's this fag spitting lazy epistemology?

>using ideas to express words

Is it possible to define 'good writing' scientifically? For example, using some combined linguistic and mathematical methodology.

does anyone else have their own autistic political theories//philosophies that only they call themselves?

I'm trying to think of this children's novel, and no where I have looked has been helpful.

It came out around 2005, and it was about a boy who discovers a passage underground to a new society where he is quickly captured by the authority but escapes with the help of another boy who lives underground and has a cat the size of a german Sheppard. The main boy also has a sister who turns out to be evil and working with the secret society in the book. It's not Gregor the Overlander. The cover was two colors, almost like paper craft, using green and black.

I keep looking for it everywhere but I keep getting back Gregor the Overlander and I know it's not that.

>>13966969
>reading Schopenhauer's critique of Kantian philosophy without having read Kant

The Iliad
The Odyssey
The Aeneid
Moby Dick
Divine Comedy

Dota 2

>>13667694
I can't sympathize. I've always viewed the Socratics as dull but unchallenging reads.
>>13668230
Retard

>Read 1 page of crime and punishment today
I feel my IQ points getting bigger, get out of my way brainlets the smart boy is coming

The peak of European power and dominance over the planet was in the middle of the 19th century. The recession from this peak was due to internal -rather than external- forces, although I'd submit that these were not inevitable. This period saw the rise of social organizations which -satisfied with conquering the planet- saw the next project to perfect the morality of their nations, eventually leading to civil rights and independence movements.

The mistaken ideal of moral perfection has led to multiculturalism and massive economic opportunity loses: the slippery slope has proven all too real as voting rights have led to a creep towards all manner of dubious rights (E.G. being called by a preferred pronoun.) From a cultural perspective, not every country is equal, and technological advances allowed Europe to dominate the world, before morality encouraged to give up their holdings.

A central dogma of Conservatism is that society and the individual should be moral, but the most dominant empires at their peak, throughout history were far from moral... and it is this contradiction which I consider to be the blindspot which will doom efforts towards the preservation of White European culture. Society doesn't fall apart because it lacks a defined morality, but because it dogmatically clings to ideals which no longer apply to its current situation.

The argument against a White identity is political correctness, although this is not politically motivated, at all, but moral. The solution to this isn't liberalism, conservatism or libertarianism, but in a pragmatic version of libertinism (De Sade failed to resolve the contradiction where the goals of numerous libertines would clash- there have to be winners and losers.)

Should morality have artistic limits?

>I've learned more from books and documentaries than I did in school.

>mfw my form of escapism is the accumulation of knowledge from multiple mediums
Who else?

People who criticize everything first are the biggest pseuds and brainlets of them all
Even if you didn't like a book or think it was subpar, the best you can do is try to extract the positives so you can learn from them

>>13093116
>Why would I bother giving my opinion? It's all subjective anyways. All I care about are cold hard facts.

>The 17th century was Spinozan
>The 18th century was Kantian
>The 19th century was Neetchean
>The 20th century was Deleuzean
>The 21st century was Baudrillardian

Philosophy is to science what alchemy is to chemistry

>>12863341
Don't be a brainlet/poltard