/lit/ - Literature

>went to take a shit
>return
>thread devolves into debates over tranny technicalities

>>20930186
>Nietzsche

>>19893088
>not risking your life by running into a burning building to save a stranger is the same as deliberately setting someone's house on fire in an attempt to kill them

>>19206700
Fiction allows you to better absorb philosophical and political themes and ideas pertaining to the human condition in relationships with other people, society, abstractions like religion, cataclysm events like war and specific negative experiences like loss. Through fiction you provide people with a controlled organic environment in which experiences unfold through which lessons and insights can be obtained without real repercussions, it is insane that subhuman autists undeserving of the gift of oxygen think themselves so smart and utilitarian by dismissing it, and this is coming from someone who mostly reads political theory, philosophy, economics, history, theology and almost no fiction.

Leave this board and never return you inbred manchild piece of shit.

What you chimpanzees need to understand is that Lucretius is a retard trying to pass a sloppy semantic paradox. God being able to create an object he can't lift is just representative of God being omnipotent, and thus should be able to create something that extends beyond his omnipotence.

If he can do anything and create anything, he should be able to create something whose properties can not be fully contained or controlled by God's own powers, which is basically the semantics game of if:

IF GOD CAN DO ALL - THEN HE CAN DO SOMETHING HE CAN'T DO

It is the idea of looking for an area of reality greater than God itself. Because if God can create something that extends beyond his capacities then there are measures of power that go beyond even God himself. It is an inherent failure to understand the concept of omnipotence itself, which is power greater than anything else. Power that extends itself beyond anything and has full control of all properties of all things that exist and that do not.

And also, this logic game is entirely about the extent of God's omnipotence, and hardly about his existence. God could very much be incapable of a number of things and still be very much a God and existent.

The very concept of OMNIPOTENCE however, is the capacity of being almighty and capable beyond anything. It could very easily overcome itself a couple times just for the fuck of it. Create something whose properties are beyond its capacity and then overcome that as well, because Omnipotence can do anything, and this paradox is merely begging it to not be capable of everything.

>>18502710
>White Anglo-Saxon Protestant modernoid whose stiff and robotic culture can not imaginably conceive the idea of two men showing any positive emotion to each other without equating it to Eros, and whose contemporary sex-obsessed culture can only understand love as sex, tries to interprete the relationships between ancient Israelites/Romans/Greeks under the lens of modernoid retardation, ends up sounding forced anyway

I second this:>>18503021

>>18478066
>And why exactly is that desirable?
Because it crafts a common identity of customs and traditions in a craft, identifying reliable tried and true methods to create competent literature that have been used in the past. Modern retards believe too much in "experimentation" and "unorthodox" creation of art but in the end we know that for a fact it only creates impenetrable, inaccessible, insufferable drivel. Only rarely developing something of wroth.

>Just because some faggot leans on ancient laws of writing as a crutch won't make him a good writer.
Then he shouldn't even write

>After all the aristocratic writer is rare, too, by virtue of there being only few aristocrats to begin with
He's obviously speaking proportionate to population you subhuman imbecile.

>No harm done then? Just ignore the retailers if you dislike them so much.
If those are the majority of the people producing a certain craft, the craft becomes synonymous with their techniques, styles and abilities. It downgrades the work, the art or medium itself, to the level of the people mostly working in it, and lowers the quality standards considerably. Look at what passes as literature nowadays, YA, shitty science fiction and fantasy, endless hordes of bottom feeders trying to create the next cash grab Harry Potter or 50 Shades of Grey. Where are our great literary thinkers? Fucking Jordan Peters and Zizek.

>Should literature just exist so that a small circle of carefree nobles can jack each other off while their subjects toil in ignorance and misery?
Literature should exist so that people can create great art in the form of fictional allegorical storytelling. If they are incapable of doing something well then they shouldn't do it at all, as not to reduce the general quality and dignity of an art form with their inadequacy, this going for both the layman and the aristocrat. And as writing is a technical craft like any art, one that requires learning and training to master, the layman is much more likely to be incapable.

>I'd rather sacrifice all the great literature created by nobles if it sets free the peasants to pursue their own literary interests
"I'm such a Joan of Arc hero of the downtrodden and oppressed, I would destroy all of literature so that more trash and drivel can be produced, just so that more poor people can write books, as being rich is a measure of moral inferiority once you are an economic illiterate who thinks the economy is a zero sum game and can't deal with their own inadequacies."

>Fuck the parasitic rent seeking nobility
"Mommy, they want me to pay rent to live in someone else's fucking property! That is evil and mean!"

Fucking faggot through and through, Tocqueville was right. Mediocrity will only bring further mediocrity, lowering the bar to bring only trash into trash.

>>18404355
>>18404383
>With an utter and complete shit economy caused by the governrment passing more market regulations, taxation and inflation that stunts the economical growth and people buying power, people are marrying later in life and having less children
>WOMEN BEING LIBERATED CAUSED THIS, I KNOW SO BECAUSE NO WOMAN WOULD ACTIVELY HAVE SEX WITH ME, IT'S LIKE THAT FOR ALL WOMEN TOWARDS ALL MEN
>WE NEED DADDY ESTATE TO FORCE WOMEN TO MARRY ME.. B-B-B-B-BECAUSE BIRTHRATES AND SHIT

>>16247767
logically speaking all it takes is pointing out to commies that it is virtually impossible to implement communism without descending into a hyper authoritarian quagmire with mass violence against working class people in order to consolidate power and often terrible famines from mismanagement by overcentralized production

the thing about commies is they are literally too stupid for logical arguments, you point that fact out and point out how it his been verified by history virtually every single time communism has been tried and they'll simply state "b-but thats different thats not how it works in my head have you even read capital?!" or "if everything is perfect though, then it will work and then everyone will live happily ever after!" and thats that. commies are so completely and utterly stupid with their head so far up their own asses they might as well not have brains at all, facts go in one ear and out the other. force is the only language they understand which is why exterminating communists was a common state policy throughout the years, there is no debate or reasoning with them, they have the fantasy in their head and they will hold on to it until the state take their heads from them

>>16219576
>"convincing tech CEOs to become monarchs"
It's amazing how many idiots misinterpret Moldy. Who am I kidding, you've never read him

>>15845450

>>15710009
Collective unconscious hivemind gang. Also you're kinda gay if you don't understand the pushing of envelopes and mixing truth with humor so they're never sure when you're serious

>>14651679
This.
>mfw OP hasn't found hundreds of quarters in the last few years

>>14338226
fuck off retard communist
>The artist is the creator of beautiful things.
>To reveal art and conceal the artist is art’s aim.
>Those who find ugly meanings in beautiful things are corrupt without being charming. This is a fault.
>Those who find beautiful meanings in beautiful things are the cultivated. For these there is hope.
>They are the elect to whom beautiful things mean only Beauty.
>There is no such thing as a moral or an immoral book. Books are well written, or badly written. That is all.
>The moral life of man forms part of the subject-matter of the artist, but the morality of art consists in the perfect use of an imperfect medium.
>No artist has ethical sympathies. An ethical sympathy in an artist is an unpardonable mannerism of style.
>We can forgive a man for making a useful thing as long as he does not admire it. The only excuse for making a useless thing is that one admires it intensely.
>All art is quite useless.

Sorry this is a gay free zone
do not gay here
thank you

oswald spengler - should i read man and technic or the fall of the west first?

>>13556126
>>13556141

>>13329779
>Buddhism
>steals Upanishadic teachings but fumbles the key parts that make it work, promotes the ancient equivalent of a new-atheism self-help guide, ceaselessly agitated against other religions and religious authorities, caused the maurya empire to collapse when it become buddhist and then it all went to shit, failed to provide any resistance against muslim invaders unlike Hindus, finally gets btfo in debates and completely obliterated as illogical and incoherent by Vedantists, becomes vanquished from India and becomes the self-help guide of ching chong rice farmers to help them quote with their meaningless existence, and is taken up by reddit new atheists in the 21st century online who misappropriate it because they perceive it as a tool to argue against theism or because they unironically fell for the meme (I don't know which is worse)
>>>neutral

lmfao

>>13137090