/lit/ - Literature

>>11130782
The real is revealed through negative space in our failed attempts to represent reality itself.

>>10981874
All three.

>>10787175
>>10787159
>solving your problems

Heheh.. nice meme

>>10340223
Art is expressionistic, its entire point is seeking communication with others. Even if you never share it the audience is implicitly contained in the work itself. If you never share it you may protect your imagination of that audience which may well be good for you but its ultimately weak and limiting yourself from expanding past the dialectic of your work and the possibility of reciprocity from other artists you influence.

>>10305557
Ordinary language is as virgin as you can get. Making up your own entire philosophic language from thin air is Chad philosophy

>>9974565
>this stuff made me believe in le spiritual magic or however you want to call it. the rule of attraction, that SECRET movie and so on.

Believe in the memes Anon, you're doing God's work

>>9937740
I got a degree in Philosophy
I'm currently going into a graduate degree in Computer Science

In five years time I'll probably be in the same position as any STEM major but I'll have the security of a foundation of Philosophic knowledge and considerations while they're neurotic messes looking for meaning in pointless rabbit holes

>>9887960
You need to go deeper, women love who makes them beloved. They do not reciprocate, they react

>>9629454
>Many psychology undergrads know the case of Aimée (a pseudonym for Marguerite Anzieu), Lacan’s patient and the subject of his now famous 1932 doctoral thesis. Aimée was jailed and put under Lacan’s ward after she tried to stab famous French actress Huguette Duflos. Aimée was described as paranoid and delusional, but Lacan was fascinated by the novel she was writing while under his care. Even Aimée couldn’t escape his avarice, as Lacan “borrowed” the novel’s manuscripts for his own scholarly work. To this day, the descendants of Aimée are trying to recover the manuscripts.

lel I bet he fucked her too

>>9283144
>I saw the abyss and ran the fuck away from it

lel you can never see the abyss you retard, what you seen what your imagination of the Real

Been making some really good breakthroughs in my readings of Husserl, Derrida, Zizek and Lacan over the past few days. Adderall is a helluva drug.

>>9258812
Fucking bitches all day; fucking bitches all day. Everyday I fuck bitches all day. And when I'm not fucking bitches all day, I make money all day; I make money all day. How could one possibly fuck bitches all day and make money all day simultaneously in one whole day you ask? This is entirely besides the point. The point is, I fuck bitches all day; I fuck bitches all day and make money all day simultaneously in one whole day.

>Jungian

lmao nu/lit/ is embarrassing

>>9029728
Which is why there is only one way forward

It is popular on /lit/ to claim Lacan is a foolish hack. These claims, buttressed powerfully by the authority of Sokal and Bricmont, tend to defuse any possibility of discussing the French analyst before it gets itself off the ground.

To prove if he is as worthy of dismissal as some of you believe, let's see if you can outwit Lacan's solution to a simple logical game. The problem was published in one of his papers, titled "Logical Time and the Assertion of Anticipated Certainty." I offer the title freely, that you may google his proposed solution if you like. But in return for this gesture of good faith, I only ask that you refrain from posting his solution until you have worked one out for yourself.

Here is the problem:

>A prison warden has three select prisoners summoned and announces to them the following:

>"For reasons I need not make known now, gentlemen, I must set one of you free. In order to decide whom, I will entrust the outcome to a test which you will kindly undergo.

>"There are three of you present. I have here five discs differing only in color: three white and two black. Without letting you know which I have chosen, I shall fasten one of them to each of you between his shoulders; outside, that is, your direct visual field-any indirect ways of getting a look at the disc being excluded by the absence here of any means of mirroring.

>"At that point, you will be left at your leisure to consider your companions and their respective discs, without being allowed, of course, to communicate amongst yourselves the results of your inspection. Your own interest would, in any case, proscribe such communication, for the first to be able to deduce his own color will be the one to benefit from the dispensatory measure at our disposal.

>"His conclusion, moreover, must be founded upon logical and not simply probabilistic reasons. Keeping this in mind, it is to be understood that as soon as one of you is ready to formulate such a conclusion, he should pass through this door so that he may be judged individually on the basis of his respose."

>This having been made clear, each of the three subjects is adorned with a white disc, no use being made of the black ones, of which there were, let us recall, but two.

>How can the subjects solve the problem?

Well?

>>8861020
>if you believe what you believe then speak it.

WEW LAD

>>8853329
No don't be retarded.
Our "motivations" (which are themselves nothing but a bubbling flux of competing intentionalities) are the result of a uncountable combination of a nexus of competing, synthecizing and even contradictory desires that is the accumulation of not only sexual desire but our relationship towards the prescribed values of others, our history and all constituted within a very individual accumulation of associations with the world around us.

There is no such thing as a pure motivation, its a fiction.

>>8767674
Some of the first and some of the last

>>8757751
Not an argument

>>8742995
>Who was ultimately right about human nature?

dude charlacan lmao

>>6580544
1. you can observe observation when you look at yourself in a mirror

2. when you look at yourself in a mirror, you see yourself as a completed whole, and this image is the self, though there is no unified self

3. a signifier without a signified