/lit/ - Literature

>>17024388
>How do you argue against determinism?
You can't. It's a well and truly insignificant issue, in the sense that it makes no sense. Common sense is and will be the gold standard anti-meme with regard to shit like this: Who the fuck cares? That's coincidentally or not also the question you'll have to ask if you come upon somebody who's trying to meme you into thinking determinism or free will for some reason or another. Why does the person care so much about whether he's predetermined or not?

The free will v. determinism issue is at its heart a *moral* issue, and so beliefs regarding one or the other aren't held because they're true, but because you conclude one or the other based on other lower-order moral presuppositions.

>>17024598
This is a pretty stupid argument desu. With regard to what are we known as 'random' or 'lucky'? This guy implicitly presupposes a stochastic universe to nullify the first-person significance of being a free agent.

>>17019980
If you explain everything ("Politics, religion, human love and human cruelty") in terms of one single thing ("sexual pathology") then the original meaning of that thing becomes fairly meaningless desu
With regard to what is sexual pathology determined?

I don't think it's the idea that everything is predetermined and that this by extension makes everything meaningless that scares people. To me that fear seems more directed toward the realization that if everything is causal, the nature of the subject becomes unknowable. You become nothing more than a marionette strung along, subject to some reality orders of magnitudes greater than any other metaphysic would suggest. If you've got free will, not only do you make your own fate, but you make yourself in the process -- that's to say you inherently know yourself. The idea that you don't know yourself is what really scares people out of their minds about determinism.

The idea of my cum is stamped on your mind. You can't remove the idea of my cum from your mind. Thus, my cum exists, and it's on your mind. QED

>>17009055
>Jung argued for the idea that trying to enter a religion which isn't culturally your own is useless. Is it true?
I personally don't think so, but you're gonna have a harder time assimilating yourself into the spiritual 'climate'. It would probably be like learning a new language, but on a much deeper level. On Jung's concerns: These were about the west at large in light of its spiritual vacuum. He was warning against jumping into undue syncretism. I don't recall him objecting as much to the idea of a driven individual pursuing what they feel is the right path.

>>16992945
>When he said that you are not what you think you are, you are what the others see in you
If you fail to clock a trans woman, is she not a woman, then?

>>16991986
Neumann's The Great Mother
Amor and Psyche
The Fear of the Feminine (really fucking hard to find online, but a great read)

Also want to echo the guy who suggested Weininger's investigations into femininity in S&C, guy is really fucking incisive and sharp. At a meta level he's also a pretty good counterpart to Neumann as a case study of the male ego's development and its failure to overcome its inherent fear of the feminine, which Neumann holds results in self-deprecation and ultimately suicide. Neumann explicitly mentions him in Origins and History of Consciousness as such a person.

Choice quotes:
>Devaluation of the Earth, hostility towards the Earth, fear of the Earth: these are all from the psychological point of view the expression of a weak patriarchal consciousness that knows no other way to help itself than to withdraw violently from the fascinating and overwhelming domain of the Earthly.
>Woman's fear of the female Self, of the experience of the numinous archetypal Feminine, becomes comprehensible when we get a glimpse - or even only a hint – of the profound otherness of female selfhood as contrasted to male selfhood. Precisely that element which, in his fear of the Feminine, the male experiences as the hole, abyss, void, and nothingness turns into something positive for the woman without, however, losing these same characteristics.

Neumann is probably the greatest insight into postmodern millenial and zoomer sexual dynamics I've ever stumbled upon. Give the guy a shot if you're interested.

>>16811243
This is my personal take - and it's one of the few critiques of Peterson I actually agree with - but he doesn't give them enough credit. Peterson draws on Heidegger but somehow fails to see any affinity with Derrida. He would probably be more correct about his analysis of "neomarxism" if he were talking specifically about the late modernists and the frankfurt school, but he doesn't specify the boogeyman he's attacking politically any further than "post-modern neo-marxist". It's ignorant and inflammatory, pure and simple.

>>16807262
>What is the DeviantArt of writing?
Tumblr

>>16802280
What's with the Peterson shills lately? I started tripfagging just for this purpose; If yall continue I won't have a reason to.