/lit/ - Literature

>>18895668
basado

>>17217401
>It's incredible how versatile these Wojak archetypes are
Almost as if... Jung was right... Take the Jungpill... Wojak and memes are just neo-representations of mythological archetypes.

>>17217028
I recommend nobody (well, maybe aside from Father Peterson). I would be recommending (You) if you wrote something, though. You have an idea which I respect, but a praxis of promoting your ideas which I do not respect.

>>17216995
>wouldn't my hermeneutic cycle be muddied by other people's opinion
Not really, seeing as you're already inclined to shun other people's opinions. You're safe to read the books. Not reading the experts on so-and-so topic is well-and-truly "just cope".

>>17214627
>Are self improvement books a scam?
Not if you take them seriously. As with any book, unless it contributes to your life in some manner, why are you reading it? (And before you object, entertainment as fiction counts as contributing -- what doesn't count is buying a book that I told you to read which just gets lost in the maillard reaction of your shelf, contributing only to your taste but never to your actual substance.)

>>17216383
>something like Nietzsche but for women
Neumann's writings on the feminine psyche:
>The Great Mother
>Amor and Psyche
Requires knowing some Jung and general psychoanalysis but the gist of things is fairly appreciable in any case.

>>17213227
>I’m desperate to be a part of a culture that I wasn’t born into, to be seen as a part of it, and to contribute literature to it.
This is just /lit/, even zoomers at large if you disqualify the literature aspect of it. I wouldn't be surprised to see somebody from this board contribute to a neo-renaissance. Your identity crisis is 'our' identity crisis, and not something that's been seen before. You choose what to do with it, bucko.

>>17215026
What self do you have to contrast your memes to? Is it all memes, or all self, or something inbetween?

Self-improoving, but without Peterson. Fake and gay

>>17196424
>Christ pill
>live later

>Nietzsche pill
>live now

It's clearly a matter of rate of time preference. Entrepreneurs will take the Christpill.

>>17196130
Using ME (the 4chan post author) and my logical prowess, I can give an account of the three as follows:
>MORALITY: things are either immoral or moral
>ETHICS: things are either unethical or ethical
>LAW: things are either illegal or legal
We group the first three terms [immoral, unethical, illegal] as the CRINGE sphere, and the latter [moral, ethical, legal] as the BASED sphere. To determine whether a thing is CRINGE or BASED, ask yourself the following:
>Do I like it? [Yes / No]
IF Yes: thing is BASED
IF No: thing is CRINGE

>>17125999
Check'd. If you skim through the archives and read the longer posts that have my names attached to them you might get a sense of what I'm saying. I would fail at explaining it in the present context.

Maps of Meaning, as evidenced by the incessant talk of the charts in it here. Filters about 99.9% of /lit/ users. Guaranteed anti-pseud. You only read it if you wanna be at the bleeding edge of complex thought.

Why would you waste your time on some noname horror novel when you could read Peterson, a clinical psychologist and renowned author, instead?

Psychoanalysis before psychoanalysis was a thing. Also an unorthodox (though interesting) reading of Kant, "women bad lul", and some rambling on great man theory. You get the sense this guy would've been a /pol/+/lit/ crossposter if he were alive nowadays.

>>17075678
>why is language so inherently ambiguous? could we live without it? could it be made to be completely unambiguous?
It's ambiguous by necessity. If there were an unambiguous language there wouldn't be any need to communicate. In the first instance we communicate to do away with information disequilibria, which implies that from the outset there's some discrepancy in what you think, and what I think. Linguistic ambiguity is a feature, not a bug. Why do you think logic is 'universal'? It's because it operates entirely by tautology and equalization; It's unambiguous. Deductive reason really says nothing at all because the conclusion is inscribed in the constellation of the premises.

>>17073143

>>17072004
So? Seethe harder, fag. I get all the (You)s

>>17058956
>Is /lit/ really the smartest board out there or it is meme?
No. I also browse other boards.

>>17053808
>What is the most concrete/fundamental concept?
You!

Tripfagging anime posters and patricians. The venn diagram of these two groups coincidentally forms a circle.

>>17029001
I'm revolted by the fact I feel inclined to partake in this. Nevertheless, here we go bros. Let's make it less cringe for you by having me be cringe instead.
>Type - INTJ stare
>Fav fiction - Good Old Neon
>Fav non-fiction - Answer to Job

>>17029771
16personalities.com
or keys2cognition if you want a supposedly more 'accurate' result

>>17023925
Ultra based incentive. I laud the effort put into the graphics. If I wasn't so hubmle I'd venture to apply to have one of my shitposts included

This is a based incentive, honestly. I always thoughts cult had the potential to be good if they could just like ... stop being bad. I think an intentionally constituted cult is better than an unintentional mob, anyway. Let me know if you need some crackpot religious theory or a structural guide to making your own to help you get started.