/lit/ - Literature

What are your personal beliefs on the Industrial Revolution?

>>17580251
You jumped to a lot of conclusions about my political perspectives over one image. I can safely say, that it is you who is retarded.

>>16765948
There was a time where men were not simps.

no i'm joking.

What philosophy does chad read?
>inb4 "he doesn't"
Chad is your physical AND intellectual superior. The genuine chad is well-versed in philosophy and the sciences, clearly, but what does he actually read?

>>16604003
That's a classic

>>15448268
A beautiful man

How do we return to nature in a modern capitalist society, brothers? Technofags need not reply.

Do you guys agree? In class my professor said that and nearly everyone disagreed with him. I think it’s a poorly worded assertion and “evil” is not well defined.

Like for a serial killer like Ted Bundy he was smart enough to Know how evil he was, but he gained so much pleasure form murdering women he did it anyways.

>Tfw cannot think of a premise for a story

The shadow of the wind

>>14431382
>119. The system does not and cannot exist to satisfy human needs. Instead, it is human behavior that has to be modified to fit the needs of the system. This has nothing to do with the political or social ideology that may
pretend to guide the technological system. It is not the fault of capitalism and it is not the fault of socialism. It is the fault of technology, because the system is guided
not by ideology but by technical necessity

I just finished reading industrial society and it's future, and I must say Ted has convinced me that all of the ills of today's society came as a result of the industrial revolution.

I'm going to go back to reading more of his work but I must say. I'm quite overwhelmed with this realization.

What is to be done, and what are the best critiques against Kaczynski and his propostions?

>>14416143
are you fucking retarded? how do you synthesize Marx - who was a technooptimist - with Kaczynski? Marx thought that technological progress would lead to a collapse of capitalism because you cannot maintain a system of wage labor with a technology that makes human labor obsolete and redundant, Kaczynski refuted Marx by noting that no matter the system technological society will always trump individual freedoms

>>14414437
>a lot of cynicism, pessimism, defeatism, nihilism, lack of hope
so - exactly the traits Uncle Ted pinpointed, he was right again
>even the most orthodox-marxist marxists ignore most of marx ideas about change
that's because these ideas are not worth a fucking penny, the whole point of contemporary Marxism and leftism is to give the people an illusion of autonomous movement through which the people could excercise their power process thus harming the actual revolutionary movements, had Marx been alive these days he would have been a Kaczynskian
>it's easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism
the end of capitalism will be the end of the world as we know it, social life - like natural life - abhors a vacuum, it doesn't matter whether the technoindustrial system presents itself under the guise of capitalism or socialism. if the west is to become socialist then so be it but know that with your petty reformist movement you are merely postponing the inevitable collapse of the technoindustrial system

What is your public library like /lit/ how would you improve it?
My library is very small and mostly filled with children’s books but it works with a network so you can order books from other libraries in the organization (there is about 12 other libraries) I’d like to make my local one bigger and have less open space and more tightly packed shelves.

>>13924664
Why do most people get angry? Because of a variety of self-preservation heuristics that are signalling to them that you are a maladaptive member of the tribe/community. These heuristics go way back and they revolve around communal survival. The anger is restrained due to the trappings of modern society but it's purpose to ideally drive you out of the tribe.
Why am I angered by anti-natalism? Because it is always marked by a strong lack of intellectual rigour. Anti-natalism is at it's core a qualitative evaluation of life. It may stem from a series of logical statements but at its core in order to say life is bad you have to assert some fundamental component of life is bad. This isn't a 'rational' argument, it's an emotional one. You can argue that the knowledge of death makes life pointless, but this is nonsensical, if we were immortal and trapped in a box would our life be more meaningful? You can argue that our experience of pain makes life meaningless, but the counterpoint would again make no sense, if we could experience a reality without pain in which we existed forever in a state of ecstasy, it might arguably be more pleasant but it would still not have more 'meaning', furthermore a lack of 'meaning' does not logically suggest that the cessation of life is a good, or bad, thing. Finally many people could argue that the highs and lows cancel out, personally I have a pretty shitty life BUT if I got to relive it all again, I would definitely agree that the 5 best days of my life are worth all the bad days. It's an entirely subjective evaluation, you cannot prove to any one person that anti natalism is a valid idea because you cannot produce an external frame of reference to evaluate it with that isn't immediately coloured by your own biases. In essence anti-natalism is as much cope as natalism, Neither can ever prove their own validity.

Unironic Mormon here. I will not be replying to (you)s because I don't like talking to people on the internet and I'm too retarded to actually debate.
The church is definitely imperfect, it's history is weird and the historical accuracy of it's texts are dubious at best. However, through study and the Holy Spirit I know
1) Christ is the only way to God
2) God really does sincerely love us and wants the best for us
3) Families are together forever
4) God works with and is aware of our every day lives
5) We can improve and change though hard work and faith in Christ
My favorite scriptures are
Ether 12:27
Alma 37:6
Haggai 1
D&C 6:33-37 (very much this one)
I would recommend reading it because I found it full of good tidbits that changed my life and brought me closer to Christ

I promise that wherever you are in life God knows you, loves you, and wants you to return to him. You can change your ways, start with basic prayers. I honestly don't care if you read the book of Mormon, just tonight try praying to God consistently and it will change your life. Ask to feel his love, ask for the blood of Christ to be applied to your soul and ask to be made strong
He loves you, if you do your best you will make it Anon. You can do it.

(Also read Anti tech revolution, it's very important but unrelated)

>>13598137
>You may disagree with the solution but the diagnosis was spot on.
Exactly. I love reading uncle Ted because he's so god damn critical of everything, including himself. His diagnosis is very good.

>>13600802
Interesting. How so

>>13587031
this

>>13487611