/lit/ - Literature

>>19525916
>But it disturbs me when they have to start going to the dictionary and redefine the word vaccine because it's low efficacy
Roll the clock back ~100 years and the talking point would be 'they've changed the definition of vaccination' because vaccination has been broadened to include artificially induced immunity. Getting bogged down in semantics is for midwits

>>17198930
1-8 of those rules could be condensed into "don't be an antisocial nigger" there's nothing unfree about living morally and respectfully

>>14321382
If you feel like lying, when saying that you're well read, just add "compared to the average person". The average person hardly reads at all, so that makes it pretty safe for you to make that statement.

>>14310064
didn't say there is no trade offs to modernity but it is not a purely bad thing.
do you think it is possible to maintain high global economic status without foreigners coming into your country?
do you think having women work (100% more workers) doesn't come with the trade off of weakened families?
do you think someone who has never seen real hardships would be a tough and strong person?
simply said over the course of history pragmatists, materialists and utilitarians have always won. do you want to be with the winners or do you want to uphold your abstract ideals? a drugged population is more productive than a nihilist population, a dead depressant is better than a live depressant, a working woman is more productive than a wife woman, a debt slave is better for the economy than a self reliant independent man, etc

>great addition to your resume/CV
>makes you more cultured
>makes you smarter
>brings you closer to understanding what is core human
>helps you with traveling
>each language has its entirely different view and image of almost everything
>more content and knowledge available
>makes you better at your first language since you become more conscious of syntax
if you are high iq learn a language from another family than your first language

>>14205590
>kafka
>Nietzsche
>Dostoevsky
>jesus
>socrates
>tolstoy
i agree with almost all of them except those.
jesus and Socrates (yeah ik socrates was kinda tryhard) were too good for their time, dos and tol were somewhere between midwit and smart, kafka didn't even try to be intellectual and nietzsche was unironically pretty good, unique and full of different ideas and concepts.
zizek could have made it into this list if he stopped his "le smart hermit" cosplay and Chomsky could have made it if he ditched linguistics and stopped being a centrist cuck about everything.
nick land was beyond saving the second he started taking accelerated substances and sartre is a crosseyed sad cuck but he gets kudos for not being an anti-soviet pussy like his peers

i want to punch the living shit out of those cunts. the guy looks like he borderline has down syndrome and i don't even know what fucking words describes that thing on the right.
thx i will add this picture to my "the failure of sexual competition" graduation thesis

>>9838483
>it's not 3500 pages about the secret schemes, plots and undergoings of ISIS the terror cell
>no 200 page long chapter about CIA operatives beheading infidels in the desert for oil money

hm

>>9683259
alright, I'm listening

what do you think makes it good? I'm too autistic to enter a gym so the book's concept appeals

>>7825994
>tfw Harold Bloom will never call you Young Man

It hurts. I don't want him to die anon.