/lit/ - Literature

>>16081965

media politics - fake news - politics of "truth" now live:

https://pykewater.com/politics/2020/8/8/media-politics-fake-news-politics-of-truth

>>16055406

it isnt ready yet with some glaring holes, but it is still fairly substantial, so:

fascism playlist is now live:

https://pykewater.com/politics/2020/8/5/fascismtotalitarianism-the-nazis


this is beginning to map out one more pillar of the "eldritch political knowledge" mainline playlists

>>15711918
I agree.

Leftists don't actually read books that aren't YA fiction, so they won't come after any worthwhile books. No worries.

So in the Republic, it gets posited that the Unjust man is most in benefit when he appears just, and thus being Unjust is more worthwhile than being Just.

But while this may be convincing, I don't so. Plato/Socrates is arguing for Justice being Valuable in itself, wheres this argument of reputation is presenting a secondary benefit to the act; which would be in the third category of pleasures/acts that Glaucon presents.
So even though they may be correct to state that the added reputation is beneficial, the innate value is what is being discussed, so whether the fact Unjust people exert themselves to appear the most Just out of everyone, the benefits of this deceit are only secondary to the primary benefits, and therefore not the topic of discussion.

Thoughts? I would be interested to see if there were people with opposing thoughts, or just interested in πολιτεια/Republic in general. An actual discussion of the Greeks instead of telling people to read them is far more encouraging toward actually getting them to read them.

>>15532162
so, no joke, i actually went to stanford, knew thiel, helped him edit the book before publication. cryptonomicon, motherfucker.

ANYWHO, i would not recommend. its obvious and basic stuff: high risk, high yield. basically, focus on the 2 companies of your portfolio of 100 that are actually earning and carrying the others. all about them blue chips and getting in early.
as far as judging shit from the "ground floor," thiel thinks competiton, at least for investments, is baaaaad. find those companies that either 1. dominate/excel in a niche, or 2. outperform their competitors by a measurable factor of 10x.
and so you see that's all sorta obvious. everyone wants in, early on, on these great VC opportunities. judgment matters, take risks, look outside the most competitive and therefore most saturated market regions, etc. etc.
das purty much it, anon.

why are you interested in this book, anyway? do you invest?

>>15502775
thank you, good anon. beauty to you.

>>15503137
i'm working on it. takes a while to review and post.

>>15337149
sure, cool, this is what i do and what i love to do in lieu of teaching: if you've got the real goods, i'd love to hook you up with the right resources/people. not guaranteeing anything but seems like some potential here.

i'll save you the trouble of a throw-away email: https://pykewater.com/

this is my private library-system; i've been ping-ponging between an estate in the berkshires (my main library location named Pykewater) and cambridge during the pandemic. it's also where i host extended seminars.
send me an email indicating who you are in the subject and we can move from there. you seem pretty interesting.

>>15337154
you're interesting as hell. see my response to the anon above; i'd invite you into further conversation over email just generally speaking.

>>15202340

that's not a revelation, bro.

even dante understood that hell was created out of SUPREME WISDOM and PRIMAL LOVE; you untune a couple of his rooted convictions and--hark--what secular, trivial discourse follows. that's where we end with your insight: back smack dab at the problem of evil. WOAH now--you think the devil might be in cohoots? a lil Job action--made into a conspiracy? dude, cmon. people have been at this for centuries.

whats on my mind is how utterly useless most of these reflections are--how strictly, fiercely, aggressively wrong you all tend to be.

>>14551443
Do you dare to accept the challenge?

What does this person read?
>Does this thot seriously believe that I, who eats and breaths politics for a living, is uneducated on the matter? What a narcissistic idiot. How dare she, my political philosophy is absolutely airtight on every front, comprehensive and completely coherent. My political leanings are dictated by hard-hitting metapsychical truths, not some pesky emotions that fluctuate throughout the day. The amount of brainpower that goes into my thinking is something that this bitch couldn't possibly fathom without it causing her brain to short circuit.

Stop reading fiction. Stop engaging with art. It's a poor imitation of a imitation. It's designed to put you in an irrational state of mind so you're more likely to accept as truth what's evidently false. Doesn't it occur to you that if you saw a man dressed as a king, with a skull in his hand, rehearsing a fictional dialogue about suicide, you would think you were witnessing a psychotic delusion? Wouldn't you call the police on that man? Yet, actors do this sort of stuff all the time, and no one seems to find strangeness. Don't you think it's a little weird that they can portray rapists, murderers, pedophiles, cheaters, charlatans and all other types of scum so well? Come on, it can't be that they...
And yet yes, it's true, fiction is evidently misleading. It acts on your subconcious because it's "pleasurable", which releases dopamine, making it more palatable the truths of a highly artificial world.
So please, i urge you. come out of your mom's basement, stop writing that terrible novel, stop reading these trash books, and stop watching these horrible films. Go out, be greeted by the sun, read books on maths, philosophy, understand your place in the universe through facts and logic, and not a warped delusion of a myth maker.

I first started reading The Classics for Pseud Cred. However, i realized that by following 4chin reading lists, and "reading" Plato, Aristotle, Homer, Aquinas etc, in a mechanical way, without doing extensive research and rereadings, is a disservice to yourself and to other anons. For example, if you start reading The Greeks by Plato, following the reading lists, by the time you get to the Republic, you'll forget The Meno, The Symposium, Phaedo, Theaetetus; all important dialogues that one should know by heart, simply for the fact that human memory can't sustain such cramming of content. At best, you'll remember vague things like "uhh Crito is bout the social contract or something" without properly engaging with the twists and turns of Socrates arguments.

How do you counter act this? Do you use any learning techniques like spaced repetition? How do you apply it to philsophy and literature?

I am interested in philosphy and bought a few books few months back -
1. Critique of Pure Reason (Beyond Comprehension)
2. Beyond Good and Evil
3. Thus Spoke Zarathustra
4. The Plague
5. The Fall
6. Exile and the Kingdom
Rest of them are somewhat in my range but still I get a feeling that I didn't start through the right books, so I bought The Republic as I heard Plato is a good entry point.
Can someone please guide me through the books, like which I ought to read first.