/lit/ - Literature

>>22921061

When I was 12 years old I stopped going to school, long story. I spent the next 11 years until now googling things and words I didn't know, reading Wikipedia, browsing forums and imageboards, getting through 20 or 30 pages of a PDF before giving up, trying and failing at the most basic algebra, etc.

Where do I even start? What books should I read? Would books even help my situation or am I just fucked? Almost half my life I've done nothing, but as of recently I've really been driven to try harder.

>>20380515
No, it doesn't, which is why you can predict a value. That's exactly the point I'm making. Learn to read.

>>19733838
>The megacorporations are creating socialism as we speak.
This is your brain on /pol/

>>19737303
> avoid rene guenon like the plague, he doesn't do metaphysics but an inferior sub category called ontotheology, that is trying to explain god(first cause) with a pseudo-metaphysical discourse full of paradoxes and logical contradictions

>>19517513

>>19414316
>Ligotti is racist
I'm guessing you thought "The Small People" was about a grounded and righteous individual battling the moral corruption of his society?

>>19176415
>the law of gravity is dogmatic
>I enjoy using random words without knowing what they mean

>he doesn’t read scientific papers to keep himself up to date with the latest scientific findings
Anyone else reading papers on topics like medicine, health and philosophy? What are some good sources to find papers? I know about Pubmed and Jstor but unfortunately much of the research isn’t free to access

meant for >>>/his/

>>17953053

>>17925294
>linking a wikipedia

>>17916744
>you won't ever understand things unless you read Kant's long-winded and autistic explanations about how in the end he can't really understand things!!!

In How To Read A Book Mortimer J. Adler writes:

>In his Elements of Law, Hobbes argues in one place that all bodies are nothing but quantities of matter in motion. The world of bodies, he says, has no qualities whatsoever.
>Then, in another place, he argues that man is himself nothing but a body, or a collection of atomic bodies in motion. Yet, admitting the existence of sensory qualities - colors, odors, tastes, and so forth - he concludes that they are nothing but the motions of atoms in the brain.
>The conclusion is inconsistent with the position first taken, namely, that the world of bodies in motion is without qualities.
>What is said of all bodies in motion must apply to any particular group of them, including the atoms of the brain.

I tried following his argument but I couldn't. Why is the conclusion inconsistent? From my understanding Hobbes argues that all bodies are atoms in motion and all bodies are without qualities. However, he realizes that there are sensory qualities like smell and so on, but from that he concludes that those are no qualities in the ordinary sense but moving atoms in the brain. I'm not familiar with Hobbes and I don't think i fully get the idea of the moving atoms in the brain (are the atoms already there and behave relative to what is perceived or are the atoms emitted from another body?), but to me his conclusion doesn't seem inconsistent at all. What am I missing, bros?

>>17765392
>basic economics

>Anon, you read War and Peace? What are your thoughts on it?
>huuuurrrr great man theory of history
>duuuurrrrr free will

>>17432985
>>17432986

>>17346574
>OP be like

Congrats! If this book aroused you...you got filtered.

>>17023888
>Stoicism
>don't have feelings

>>16970768
its not fair bros... I want to get into dragon ball but I'm a brainlet who dedicated his life to reading philosophy
plato cannot guide me through this intellectual labyrinth

>>15806906
>the median income divided by GDP proves the poor are not getting richer

>>15599987
>In 1973, he wrote a book called "Le Camp des saints" (Camp of the Saints), which predicted mass-third world immigration into the west.

wow what a bold prediction, who could have really seen it coming?