/lit/ - Literature

>>14004429
It’s not funny. People here are just immature brainlets, thinking saying taboo words is rebellious and funny.

>>14004439
Fpbp

Those gas prices are fucking funny holy shit

Its funny because the line is typically something you would expect someone to think rather than say, and the fact that he says it highlights both his lack of intelligence and his lack of inhibitions, two qualities the reader is expected to have already observed in the character and is now rewarded for having observing. Its observational humor, the kind of humor who's primary appeal is to be "in on the joke", and it is therefore socially based, as it originally developed as a form of social currency exchange as described by Rao.

nigger is just inherently funny

>>14004439
I honestly thought it was pretty funny and it's not exclusively because of the word nigger, I just liked the prose. Plus what's wrong with finding the word nigger funny in this specific context? You act like it can't be funny just because it's taboo. Making light of taboo is a staple of great literature.

>>14004439
found the nigger

>>14004429
Can't get over how good that is

>>14004447
Really solid post thank you
That said aren't you building a lot of assumptions into that? I.e. we know nothing about this man and from personal experience I'd guess that he's more intelligent than at least half of the posters here

>>14004459
this guy is going to be banned.

>>14004470
Unjustly

>>14004470
found the other nigger, unless you're the samenigger

>>14004429
Juvenile sniggering at the word.

>>14004466
the assumptions were already drawn from the original meme.

>>14004429
this pasta is almost a year old? the concept of time can really fuck you up

>>14004476
obv
>>14004485
no, i've just been noticing that people are actually getting banned for racism outside of /b/ lately

>>14004489
Yes but doesn't this mean anyone who isn't familiar with the original meme will interpret the story differently? If so, is it still funny to those people, and why?

>>14004491
oh fuck

>>14004488
funny comment, butterfly

>>14004489
There is nothing about this that indicates the subject's low intelligence. If anything, this demonstrates the observer's low IQ...

>>14004466
Its not about the man himself, the man doesn't really exist to us. Its about the character. We have an image and we have a few lines and that describes the entirety of the character's existence to us, the rest of him we hypothesize. It's not so much a joke about this particular man as it is a joke about this "kind of man", part of the joke is that this is the character we subconsciously conjure up when we see this image, there is some subtle commentary on human prejudice in the post itself as self-aware humor, or the "prophet's humor" - humor about the human condition.

>>14004488
>Sniggering
Nice word choice there

>>14004439
I repeat this story any time I feel any anxiety. I recite it word for word in my mind. By the time I say, "with a car, you can go anywhere", my anxiety is gone and I have a smile on my face. I hope you get cancer.

>>14004429
Literally the only funny part is the last sentence

>>14004488
Haha what a great post butterfly!

>>14004497
anyone who never saw the original meme will be able to synthesize their experience of the new meme with the experience of the people who saw the original one and already know about sleazecore, by memetic processes.

>>14004488
Read the Bible you foul mouthed broad

>>14004455
Making light of taboo subjects is one thing, the story above tries to make a joke out of the word itself, hence why it is capitalised and treated as the main subject of that guys thoughts. As for the prose, it’s garbage: “the cool wind...” is out of place, “reverberated his entire car” does not even make sense, “the wine washed away his fear of minorities” is clearly untrue since he’s just expressed his fear, and the stylometry of that whole sentence is clunky and retarded. The last line is good though, it delivers the punchline with good timing.
But yeah overall it’s not funny. The adult version of peepee poopoo.

>>14004504
The more you post the more enlightened I am

>>14004504
The man exists to me and I find myself involuntarily coming to his defense against the biases woven into the story though. I also find it hilarious. What is funny to me in particular?

>>14004495
Oh, my apologies then. And yes the janiggers have been laying ruin with their mystic ban hammer as of late. But, alas, it is their job to keep this board clean after all. I just hope they are being compensated monetarily for their good work.

>>14004524
Well now that I have you let me not miss the chance to point you on to this if you haven't read it already:
https://www.ribbonfarm.com/the-gervais-principle/
If you enjoyed my posts you'll find this incredibly pleasurable and informative, enjoy

>>14004429
By "with a car you can go anywhere you want" he means that if you're in the car you shouldn't be afraid of niggers because they can't hurt you therefore you can go anywhere

>>14004531
>The man exists to me
No he doesn't. Even on the off chance you know the person in the image personally he isn't the same as the character, so he isn't "the man", there is no "man" here, just the character.
> I also find it hilarious. What is funny to me in particular?
I don't know, I'd have to talk to you more. There's a lot of layers of humor going on in the post which is why its so genius. People who are claiming that the joke is simply that he says "nigger" are catching only the lowest level of humor there, that said its still funny.

>>14004455
>I liked the prose
Can everyone on this shitty board please just stop uising this phrase? It's completely meaningless.

>>14004533
no doubt they are. i cannot imagine one would spend their free time deleting racist posts on a public forum for free. the very notion is ridiculous! i am quite sure that they must be appropriately compensated.

>>14004565
>t. has shit prose

>>14004554
>I'd have to talk to you more.
What could I reveal which would clue you into the psychological triggers etc involved here?

>>14004554
My first reaction was to laugh maniacally and then to begin wondering why anyone would assume that he was stupid when in the original meme the woman writing observations is clearly a moron. For example there isn't actually anything wrong with much of what she's criticizing and it appears to be mostly feigned outrage over something she doesn't understand

>>14004488
based rhyme, b-fly

>>14004429
The man in the story is on a frantic, paranoid journey. He's smoking while pouring gas as well as drinking and driving, two highly dangerous activities. This creates a paradox. The character is running from danger (niggers) while simultaneously engaging in dangerous behavior himself. In the final line he speaks a non sequitur, a seemingly random anecdote about the nature of automobiles. However, the quip is not totally random, but rather it shows how quickly his focus shifts from subject to subject, again implying some sort of paranoia/neurosis. The humor comes from the absurd and contradictory nature of the man so briefly yet vividly portrayed. Also the word nigger is fucking hilarious.

>>14004578
I don't know, at this point I think you might be seeing me as more intelligent than I am or mocking me because you see me as trying to appear intelligent, either way it amounts to the same. I'm just sure that if we analyzed it more between us I would realize what appeals to you about it.
>>14004587
Then I would tentatively say that what you find humorous about it is that it mocks the woman's sensational reaction by going over the top in a deadpan way about the character as if to say that the character is even worse than the woman supposed and what's more, there's nothing amiss about it. Which is a form of sociopathic humor if you enjoy it completely by yourself, or humor-as-a-weapon if you enjoy it in the mental context of laughing at her with others in this community, because you are putting the woman down for trying to construct such a sensational reaction, in essence you are saying "what sloppy social engineering work, woman!"

>>14004607
Excellent post

>>14004607
It's just some guy filling up his car though, also smoking at a gas station isn't actually dangerous at all. "Niggers" are actually dangerous. The character's concerns are real and tangible while the assumptions you're referencing are largely nonsensical.

>>14004619
>at this point I think you might be seeing me as more intelligent than I am or mocking me because you see me as trying to appear intelligent, either way it amounts to the same. I'm just sure that if we analyzed it more between us I would realize what appeals to you about it.
I was merely attempting to explore your opinion further as you clearly know a lot about this subject and you've provided me with great insight thus far... it strikes me as extremely strange that you read in these ideas of intelligence and mockery—those seem random frankly. From this post you've given me the impression that you are extremely insecure.

>>14004619
>it mocks the woman's sensational reaction by going over the top in a deadpan way about the character as if to say that the character is even worse than the woman supposed
But does it? It cannot do all of these things simultaneously. Some of these layers are mutually exclusive. What was the author's original intent?

>>14004507
Quality post

>>14004521
Does it say something about someone who disagrees? What if the most rational, mature, intelligent person in the world laughs at this and comes to the opposite conclusion that you have here¿

>>14004639
>I was merely attempting to explore your opinion further as you clearly know a lot about this subject and you've provided me with great insight thus far...
So then it was the first one.
> it strikes me as extremely strange that you read in these ideas of intelligence and mockery
Read in "knowledgeable" instead of intelligence if it helps. You thought perhaps I was knowledgeable enough to predict what exactly appealed to you about it with what little information I had - I'm not that knowledgeable, unfortunately.
> From this post you've given me the impression that you are extremely insecure.
Your tone in the rest of the post already conveyed that. Now that this is your impression of me nothing I can say will remove it - which hardly matters, I'm just an anonymous poster - but I will get the conversation back on track by saying go reread that 2 post exchange and try to see what I meant. There really were either 2 options from my perspective, given that I couldn't answer you - you were either giving me too much credit or poking fun at my vaguely intellectual tone. This current interaction between us is likely because you read my "mocking me" piece as a confrontational statement - kind of nerdy "stop making fun of me" kind of thing, in reality it was just a possible observation.
>>14004655
> Some of these layers are mutually exclusive.
I disagree. Multi-layered humor is purposely ambiguous, interpretative, and non-binary - this allows the user to use it as a social tool while simultaneously wielding plausible deniability to escape the consequences of possible interpretive meanings.

>>14004698
>Your tone in the rest of the post already conveyed that
Wrong, you made these assumptions and said everything but the reality. Also you are indeed knowledgeable enough to answer my questions in a productive manner, but now we've gone off on a tangent because of this strange insecurity you seem to have. I don't know why you insist on assuming you can't help me further—that's bizarre and I think you're only taking that position to bolster your other statements. If we could rewind this conversation you'd see that you're simply making baseless assumptions...

>>14004698
>>14004718
Also you suggest that I might have interpreted something as confrontational when in reality I'm simply at a loss to explain the tangent you appear to insist on following desu

>>14004607
Why the lime?

>>14004718
Now its my turn to be confused. What do you mean by assumptions?
> Also you are indeed knowledgeable enough to answer my questions in a productive manner, but now we've gone off on a tangent because of this strange insecurity you seem to have. I don't know why you insist on assuming you can't help me further
Go and reread the posts. All that I was saying was that at the time, given the information I had, I couldn't tell you with confidence what appealed to you about it. You're reading into things oddly, how exactly could this tactic you think I'm taking "bolster my other statements"?
>If we could rewind this conversation
We can, the entire post history is sitting right above us. Analyzing it could be a fun exercise in social dynamics.

>>14004747
Damn you, okay give me a moment

>>14004730
Now this is a social maneuver you do without thinking - I am the one following the tangent rather than you, to put the responsibility for the faux pas on the other party in the interaction. In reality we both chose to follow this weird tangent. The use of eclipses functions to replace in text what would be in spoken conversation an incredulous look, either at the subject (me in this case) or at some third party in the room.

>>14004754
Sure thing, in the meantime I made another post attempting to analyze a post by you as well if you want to check it out

>>14004756
>eclipses
ellipses*

>>14004439
Its so not funny that I find it funny. When he says NIGGERS i picture George Costanza, or Alex Jones saying DEVILL

>>14004429
It's more fascinating than funny.
I like the guy story and image. It puts me in the situation and in the mindset. It is a mindset I have within me. It appeals to the doomer I am. Dark ambiance, dark thoughts (about niggers), hope incarnated in the car and his awareness in order to be able to flee, he also incarnate the freedom of an animal in danger. He is sympathetic. All details plays their roles in this painting. I like to have empathy, it's about feels. It's also about poesy in the trivial.

>>14004439
It is funny. You are the brainlet. Time to return to reddit.

>>14004756
>Now this is a social maneuver you do without thinking - I am the one following the tangent rather than you, to put the responsibility for the faux pas on the other party in the interaction. In reality we both chose to follow this weird tangent. The use of eclipses functions to replace in text what would be in spoken conversation an incredulous look, either at the subject (me in this case) or at some third party in the room.
The things you're saying are true and I agree. However, now this has become a game of semantics. I'm not debating the objective truth of the things in this post that I'm quoting, and I am indeed taking the stance that you are responsible for the 'faux pas'. We of course are both partly responsible but in terms of magnitude you bear the lion's share which is the entire point here. My take on this conversation thus far:
>ask questions in earnest
>perceptive and knowledgeable poster replies
>suddenly the tone of the conversation changes and he raises issues of potential mockery and potentially assuming too much of him (why?)
In reality I was doing neither and you were indeed answering me productively, and I thought absolutely nothing about what you said until you said it.

I believe that you're now forced to essentially double down on the idea that you can't help me further because anything else requires you to essentially act as though you weren't mistaken or responsible for this tangent. Am I wrong?

>>14004772
He looks paranoid in the image, you get his back story, its great. He reminds me of Terry Davis but a coked up paranoid instead of schizo. And the nonsensicle final line is like an iceberg into a deeper story

>>14004795
>He looks paranoid in the image
He's just pumping gas. His face is ambiguous at best.

The thing that gets me the most is
>(merited)

>>14004784
>I'm not debating the objective truth of the things in this post that I'm quoting, and I am indeed taking the stance that you are responsible for the 'faux pas'. We of course are both partly responsible but in terms of magnitude you bear the lion's share which is the entire point here.
Interesting.
>In reality I was doing neither
This is where we're off. You were "doing" the first one - because at that point I was unable to answer the question. Do you see what I mean?
Think of it as a binary logic tree. When you said:
>What could I reveal which would clue you into the psychological triggers etc involved here?
There are two interpretive options:
1. You mean this in earnest, in other words you genuinely believe that I could tell you the answer and that is why you are asking.
2. You mean this in jest. You are saying it ironically for some purpose.
(in reality there is a third option which is that it was a mix irony and sincerity and meant to be interpreted as both at once - this is how most people on this site speak, but we'll ignore it for simplicity)
If it was the first option then it follows that my knowledge/intelligence was over-estimated, because I cannot in fact provide the answer.
If it was the second one than the likely candidate is that it was a point of mockery - not necessarily unfriendly, as it could have been a playful shit-test - purposely poking fun at the assumed role of "knowledgeable person asking questions".
Also, as this post-chain itself bears witness to, if you want to be socially effective here's a tip - if someone is mocking you, never acknowledge it (that's not me subtly saying you were in fact mocking, the results are catastrophic regardless of whether the intent was mockery or not) and never say anything that could be interpreted as a defensive statement - it will always backfire.
Cont.

>>14004784
>I believe that you're now forced to essentially double down on the idea that you can't help me further because anything else requires you to essentially act as though you weren't mistaken or responsible for this tangent. Am I wrong?
Here's the problem: I'm not saying that I can't help you further, indeed if your interest was the principles of social dynamics, I believe that I am helping you right now. What I was saying was this: at the time of you making post, I sincerely could not answer the question. To further back this up, in my response post I said that I couldn't tell you, but if we talked more, I could probably pinpoint you. So on the contrary, I implied that I COULD help you further, but just that I needed more information to do so, as opposed to claiming that I couldn't help you further, as you are claiming that I did.
>Am I wrong.
Yes, demonstrably on the first point, which is
>you weren't mistaken
But the second point
>responsible for this tangent
remains to be determined. For that I have to ask - how do you determine responsibility? And that's not a general "you", I mean you specifically.

>>14004455
>liked the prose

What's good about it? There isn't a single semicolon in there.

>>14004822
>because at that point I was unable to answer the question
This is false and is my entire point right now. You were doing fine and for no apparent reason you volunteered those ideas of mockery, etc. You're right about most of what you're saying but you appear to be guilty of exactly what I am saying here >>14004784
>I believe that you're now forced to essentially double down on the idea that you can't help me further because anything else requires you to essentially act as though you weren't mistaken or responsible for this tangent. Am I wrong?
Read: You're now in a position where you must continue to believe this, no? Thanks for the advice about navigating social situations but again it appears that you've volunteered this all as a consequence of your initial mistake.

You also appear keen on analyzing every single possible statement rather than simply admitting what I am saying here might be true for some reason which is "interesting"

>>14004439
This. If you changed it to any other racial insult for non blacks these morons wouldn't find it the least bit funny. High brow 4chan intellectuals in a nutshell.

>>14004845
>indeed if your interest was the principles of social dynamics
It wasn't. You lead the conversation in that direction. I appreciate your advice nonetheless but it strikes me as ironic considering I don't care one bit for who is correct here beyond the satisfaction of coming to some kind of consensus with someone who I believe is more or less on the level. That's about it.

Essentially I believe I have run afoul of your ego somehow and this has resulted in a situation where you have no choice but to continue this pointless conversation rather than admitting that there is at least some truth to my claim above. This is a matter of degree/magnitude but to you it seems to boil down to this:
>>14004822
>Think of it as a binary logic tree
Are you a programmer by any chance?

To answer you, responsibility in this context: You decided that you couldn't answer my question when in reality you were answering more than competently up until that point and had you done nothing other than continue to try to answer my question in the same manner as your previous posts we would not be having this discussion. The info you volunteered in conjunction with your tone seemed out of touch, disproportionate, odd, random. If we distill this to its constituent parts rather than analyzing individual statements taken out of context what we have is fundamentally what I said here

>>14004867
>This. If you changed it to any other racial insult for non blacks these morons wouldn't find it the least bit funny. High brow 4chan intellectuals in a nutshell.
White people in the US don't jump guys who look like this for no reason, therefore replacing "niggers" with "crackers" or something similar would destroy the entire joke. The fact that you find the word itself offensive or taboo is almost entirely beside the point. You seem terribly fixated on it.

>>14004860
>This is false and is my entire point right now.
How do you know it is false? It was true. At that point I couldn't tell you what you found funny about it because I didn't know enough about your reaction. Also, I couldn't even tell you any possible triggers because I don't have them conceptualized - I am inventing all this on the fly.
This has me really confused, what exactly makes you believe that I could answer you and was lying about it in that post? By that post I mean this one:
>>14004619
If I could simply provide the answer - in this instance it would probably take the form of a list of possible "psychological triggers", as a species, then why wouldn't I? What do I possibly have to gain by not doing so?
You say "for no apparent reason" but this is the clue that you are wrong, no one does something for "no apparent reason", there is always a reason, and in games of a social and conversation nature you have to accept the most viable solution, because hard solutions do not exist unless you are inside the minds of all participants.
> but you appear to be guilty of exactly what I am saying here
Alright, well I've said my piece at length, now it is your turn - based on what evidence?
>You're now in a position where you must continue to believe this, no?
I don't know what you are referring to. If it was my position, then I am confused - what do you think I am losing out on if I were to say "yes I did have the knowledge and I simply decided not to reveal it"? I would lose no social currency if I did so at this point, actually I would probably GAIN some. I believe you are confused in terms of strategy analysis.
>you've volunteered this all as a consequence of your initial mistake.
Now this is actually true. As I described in the post you responded to, it was indeed a grave social mistake - don't make it in real life. Fortunately, because we are anonymous posters there are no stakes save the association with our ideas.
>You also appear keen on analyzing every single possible statement
Well yes, that is exactly what I am here in this thread to provide - analysis of social dynamics. This is my way of keeping the conversation "on track" and focused on that topic. I even said earlier that I would treat this as a social exercise.
I hope we're not just stuck in the same place in your next post. If you are going to stick to your claims please provide evidence so we at least have something interesting to talk about, otherwise I will leave the conversation.

>>14004897
>You lead the conversation in that direction.
I believe it was what I was talking about the entire time.
>I don't care one bit for who is correct here beyond the satisfaction of coming to some kind of consensus with someone who I believe is more or less on the level. That's about it.
I'm very glad to see you feel that way, so do I and its the best mentality to take for this kind of forum.
>Essentially I believe I have run afoul of your ego somehow and this has resulted in a situation where you have no choice but to continue this pointless conversation rather than admitting that there is at least some truth to my claim above.
Yes obviously, but I believe I have clearly demonstrated that this is an illogical conclusion.
Also if you think this conversation is "pointless" we should probably stop now, I'm only continuing on the pretense that you also find value in social analysis. If you don't, then the only reason we are continuing is for me to defend myself - which I am not interested in.
>Are you a programmer by any chance?
Close, I'm a mathematician.
>you were answering more than competently up until that point
But this has no bearing on my success or failure in answering future questions.
> had you done nothing other than continue to try to answer my question in the same manner as your previous posts we would not be having this discussion.
Probably, but I was not confident in my ability to answer and my goal in this thread is not to avoid "social mishaps" - it is to give clear answers that I am confident in.
>The info you volunteered in conjunction with your tone seemed out of touch, disproportionate, odd, random. If we distill this to its constituent parts rather than analyzing individual statements taken out of context what we have is fundamentally what I said here
But here you are outright wrong. I have already explained why my post was logically necessary, far from "random".

>>14004905
>You say "for no apparent reason" but this is the clue that you are wrong, no one does something for "no apparent reason", there is always a reason, and in games of a social and conversation nature you have to accept the most viable solution, because hard solutions do not exist unless you are inside the minds of all participants.
The key operand here is 'apparent'—I believe you did it for a stupid reason and you are confirming that in my mind by continuing to behave as I predicted in the beginning. In the end I don't care much about who is right or wrong here beyond whatever minor satisfaction I would derive from seeing you admit that essentially yes, you for no good reason did in fact choose to steer the conversation in this direction rather than taking a moment to attempt to answer my question in good faith, and that yes you are indeed choosing to continue down this path because you prefer that to whatever bruise to your ego admitting that you're wrong would constitute. You seem very interested in social dynamics but you're responsible for virtually all mention of them here. Again 'responsibility' being what you have done—what you have posted. Challenging my definition of responsibility to avoid admitting a simple truth is just stupid

>>14004929
>But this has no bearing on my success or failure in answering future questions.
Yes you goofy cunt, my only point is that you went off track there for some reason, you seem keen on debating whether or not this was logical for me to conclude when you are simply fucking doing it. It's like this guy here >>14004867
his post depends on the notion that somehow whites and blacks are equal and that the audience takes this falsehood for granted

similar failure of logic

>>14004929
>I have already explained why my post was logically necessary, far from "random".
lol 'logically necessary', you are high on your own supply rn fren
>Interesting, can you elaborate?
>"It appears you think I have a small dick."
>Huh?

>>14004938
Shh, you're bringing down the level of discourse...

>>14004930
>The key operand here is 'apparent'
Excellent pivot
> believe you did it for a stupid reason and you are confirming that in my mind by continuing to behave as I predicted in the beginning
In order for it this to outcompete my explanation logically you would have to find that reason though. There isn't any, its a completely bizarre move to make.
In many cases in real life someone who expects social hostility (this is what you mean when you say "insecure") will often snap back defensively at non-hostile remarks. This is almost certainly how you are interpreting me, but if that were the case, I would have said something like "are you mocking me?" Rather than outlining the two possible options as a point of analysis. The fact that you are still clinging to your explanation only shows how deep social cues run in our minds - that's not an insult, just a point of analysis.
> You seem very interested in social dynamics but you're responsible for virtually all mention of them here.
Well I thought posters were interested. They were responding to my posts and asking me questions so I continued offering analysis. If you aren't actually interested in that, then there is no point in continuing the conversation, so yes or no - are you interested in taking this as an example of analysis?
>Challenging my definition of responsibility to avoid admitting a simple truth is just stupid
Fortunate then that that isn't what I'm doing. Also, now you are acting as if I am hostile - I wasn't "challenging" your definition, in order to challenge your definition you would need to have provided a definition in the first place, which you haven't. I was merely asking for your take on social responsibility.
>Yes you goofy cunt, my only point is that you went off track there for some reason, you seem keen on debating whether or not this was logical for me to conclude when you are simply fucking doing it.
Now it seems as though you are getting frustrated that you have been proven wrong.
Note - you haven't provided any evidence or argumentation in these two posts, you've merely repeated your claims over and over with no support them. If this is a debate, I am "winning" and you are getting heated that I am winning. This can be seen in your resorting to implied insult, in the short length of your posts, and the use of profanity as accentuators to your claims.
Now in real life, handling the "debate" in this manner and nakedly revealing the truth about it - and being this completely, absurdly autistic about things - would be social suicide. Luckily this is an anonymous forum, so there are 0 stakes for me, so I can do it just to observe your reaction with no repercussions.

>>14004447
Which Rao? Raja Rao?

>>14004967
Nothing new in this post.
>>14004970
Yes, and he is doing it for the reasons outlined in my last post.

>>14004439

>>14004999
Venkatesh Rao, see
>>14004541
It's an eye-opening read although long.

>>14004439
There are countless posts with the word nigger that nobody finds funny, you have to be autistic to not get why this one is amusing.

>>14004994
This isn't a competition, and if you want to see an excellent pivot take a look at >>14004970, tone policing but no arguments etc, as if the 'discourse' was somehow on a higher level just because it was cloaked in verbiage and feigned intellectualism

Do we even disagree? You're just stubbornly refusing to admit what I'm saying has any truth to it. That's why I'm taking this stance—it's like when a child discusses literally anything but the one thing they don't want you to investigate, it's just absurd. Big dead zone here in our discussion but I'm not sure you even really disagree fully, but you appear committed and willing to die on this hill regardless

>>14005012
So what is it, then?

>>14005037
>You're just stubbornly refusing to admit what I'm saying has any truth to it.
Because it doesn't. Have you even considered that you might be wrong? Really think on that for your own sake.
>it's like when a child discusses literally anything but the one thing they don't want you to investigate
Completely false here because not only have I directly answered to all your claims, I have also done so while remaining committed to my previous goal of social analysis. Rather, you are being the child here, if I may so.
Also
>feigned intellectualism
Oho? So now I am not smart when it suits you, when previously I was when it suited you? Which is it?
To turn off super autism mode for a moment: Come on dude. Give it up.
>but you appear committed and willing to die on this hill regardless
Now this is just projection and I'm starting to think a lot of your earlier comments were also.
Side note for the other anon who I guess is reading our posts: this is not the reaction I expected. I expected a long, angry, raging post with a very low intellectual level.

>>14005041
the contrast between the style of narration and the ridiculousness of his character and his internal monologue/speech. it is pretty basic

>>14005037
Also, fuck it, I'm proud of my work. Yes, the other anon was right, my level of discourse has been very high and I have provided some very good material. Not going to act false humble and deny that, after all, there are no stakes.

>>14004994
>Note - you haven't provided any evidence or argumentation in these two posts, you've merely repeated your claims over and over with no support them
What constitutes evidence for you? You'd rather debate the definition of words rather than respond in good faith so at this point this is looking like a lost cause to me. You're also more interested in what was "logically necessary" rather than what actually happened, objectively, in real life. Perhaps you've read too many books on argumentation or something and you think this stuff is going to change my view, or maybe not, but in that case what's your point now? What motivates you? My motivation was simply education, yours now appears to be preserving ego

>>14005076
You argue like a woman

>>14005094
>my level of discourse has been very high
> as if the 'discourse' was somehow on a higher level just because it was cloaked in verbiage and feigned intellectualism

>>14005095
>What constitutes evidence for you?
Its not exactly a mystery. How about we start with something other than a repetition of the claim? Evidence is something that supports and leads to a claim in a logical sense, not just the claim restated.
>so at this point this is looking like a lost cause to me.
Translation: I got thrashed and this is my way out while saving face. In terms of social dynamics I call this the "plausible denial play". Applies to a lot of situations.
>You're also more interested in what was "logically necessary" rather than what actually happened
Dude, are you being serious here? Read that statement out loud and hopefully realize that it was completely moronic.
>you think this stuff is going to change my view
Since a few posts ago when I sized up what kind of person you were this has been for the benefit of interested anons reading and for myself as an observational experiment, not for your benefit or to change your view.
>, but in that case what's your point now? What motivates you? My motivation was simply education, yours now appears to be preserving ego
In actuality it is quite the reverse. Again, you are projecting.
>>14005110
>>14005117
Now this is more what I was expecting except it is much lazier and phoned in. It appears my "opponent" has become exhausted.

>>14005141
You seem upset. Are you calm and collected right now? Have you been the entire time?
>>14005141
>Now this is more what I was expecting except it is much lazier and phoned in. It appears my "opponent" has become exhausted.
You see to be missing some fundamental understanding of causality, again similar to >>14004867

>>14005095
Also at this point I am out, I'm heading towards a meeting. Thanks for playing along, you'll make an obligatory "last word" post I'm sure. (yes this is my most ironic post yet)

>>14005148
Well actually I guess this is my last word post.
>You seem upset. Are you calm and collected right now? Have you been the entire time?
Classic social tear-down maneuver used more on 4chan than in real life, because in real life it can backfire make you seem like a dick, especially if the person actually is upset. No need to explain it any further as its so standard on here that everyone already knows how it works.
Now I really am leaving, you do yours. As before thanks for the conversation, I mean that sincerely it was actually really fun and enlightening for me and I'm impressed you stuck with those super-long autism posts for that long.

What the fuck is happening in this thread

>>14005141
>Translation: I got thrashed and this is my way out while saving face. In terms of social dynamics I call this the "plausible denial play". Applies to a lot of situations.
You lead with that though. In fact you have been repeating this stuff the entire time. Again the only reason we are having this discussion is because your ego was bruised. There's no face to be saved—the only ones who know we're having this conversation are jannies and intelligence services who possess the metadata of this autistic exchange. The only stake here is your ego vs my willingness to continue to entertain this conversation.

Again it all boils down to this:
>>14004619
> at this point I think you might be seeing me as more intelligent than I am or mocking me because you see me as trying to appear intelligent, either way it amounts to the same.
None of the above, and seemingly random. You said people never do anything without cause, so my first thought is that you did it for a stupid reason and not maliciously, although if your contention is that you are maliciously feigning a lack of intelligence then that baffles me as well. Above all else I am confused by your behavior and lack of candor. And again you don't 'win' by simply shitposting until I give up, exhausted or not, and if that's your goal then you really do have a ridiculously inflated ego and a terrible underlying insecurity related to that

>>14005165
It was a fun thread until these two faggots started chimping out at each other.

>>14005163
>Well actually I guess this is my last word post.
>>14005150
>>14005163
>Classic social tear-down maneuver used more on 4chan than in real life, because in real life it can backfire make you seem like a dick, especially if the person actually is upset. No need to explain it any further as its so standard on here that everyone already knows how it works.
lol all this writing to avoid answering the question, funny because that was your original error which is why we're having this discussion

>>14004507
this desu, this meme helped me center myself when i was peaking on acid. it's reminiscent of finding the eye of the storm.

>>14005181
>this desu, this meme helped me center myself when i was peaking on acid. it's reminiscent of finding the eye of the storm.
what was that like?

>>14004439
I like the last line, otherwise I agree. It's not only unfunny but also poorly written.

>>14004429
>last line
What makes it humorous is how comically storyesque it is. It's like hearing some weirdo blurt out a quote from Sin City without proper context or buildup. It's melodrama; there's an obvious fraudulence to it.

>>14004447
>Its funny because the line is typically something you would expect someone to think rather than say
>these are the thoughts anon thinks to himself

>>14005206
>I like the last line, otherwise I agree. It's not only unfunny but also poorly written.
the only poorly written part is the bit about the reverb honestly.
>(merited)
pure genius

>>14005206
This is the most pretentious load of shit I've read in this entire thread
>humorous
Remove stick from anus

>>14005223
>this is the most pretentious shit in the thread
>this
The entire thread is two hyper autistic anons having a shitflinging contest and yet this is the most pretentious thing? lmao

>>14005076
>Oho? So now I am not smart when it suits you, when previously I was when it suited you? Which is it?
Your intelligence only became a point of conversation because you raised it and continued to press it repeatedly, nobody else cares, I'm sorry for your mother

>>14005215
>>(merited)
>pure genius
yes having a character say a nono word, then patting him on the back, is genius (genius)

>>14005223
>This is the most pretentious load of shit I've read in this entire thread
Well then you're smart enough to have not read much else, congratulations

>>14005251
the humor behind (merited) little or nothing to do with "NIGGERS"

>>14004565
Nobody on /lit/ is intelligent enough to have an opinion, explain their opinion and defend their opinion. You need to lower your standards.

>>14005270
>Nobody on /lit/ is intelligent enough to have an opinion, explain their opinion and defend their opinion. You need to lower your standards.
behold: a meaningful post

>>14005270
is any opinion truly defensible ?

>>14005332
are you 12 years old?

>>14004439
Leck mich im Arsch

the smartest pepple out there tend to have the strangest juvenile sense of humor

look at martin luther's fart jokes

>>14005363
no

>>14005374
13?

Please no racism on /lit/

>>14005205
I was standing in line at a gas station waiting for my tripsitter to buy some water. I didn't realize it at that point, but in front of me in the line were two black gentlement, The gas station felt like a predator, an antagonistic force. I was feeling a bit anxious, until i thought to myself that with a car, you could go anywhere I wanted. Now, I didn't own a car, but that didn't matter. It wasn't meant to be taken as if ownership of a car was important. In that moment, I felt as if I embodied that entire image. It is as if the meme and me were indistinguishable for a single moment. I tried to start explaining it to my tripsitter, but the entire experience felt so relieving, so hilarious that after saying "with a car" I was laughing so hard that I had to leave the line and wait outside.

>>14004542
only if you remember to lock your doors

>>14005511
>trip sitter
>public place
odd way to do acid

>>14005616
It was my first time with psychadelics. We were talking a walk and he just wanted to buy some food and water.

>>14005625
>It was my first time with psychadelics
Have you done any since then?

>>14005652
I'm going to do a 450ug dose of acid pretty soon as my second time. Alone

>>14005660
That sounds fun, any plans for music or toys of any kind?

>>14005037
Dude, you’re out of your element. Give it up. You’ve been BTFO’d.

>>14005669
I'm aiming for a more exploratory trip - I don't think acid should be used recreationally. It's for my shamanism uni thesis.

>>14004439
with a keyboard, you can post whatever you want

>>14005691
good post

>>14005686
>I don't think acid should be used recreationally
t. used it once

>>14005779
There's a certain frivolity to modern drug use that's unhealthy.

>>14005899
I'm just busting your balls anon, you have the right idea, I'd say sparingly rather than not recreationally whatsoever

>>14004429
Family Express

It's absurd and unexpected. Laughing is a natural reaction so explaining why something is funny is pointless. I see that didn't stop the big brains in this thread to highschool-literature the shit out of it though, feigning meaning unto it just to flex their own ego.

>>14004429
If you like this, try Harassment Architecture by Mike Ma.

>>14004447
>T. Brianlet
No, it is not about laughing at how dumb the character is. Not everything is about intellect anon. It is about how eccentric the character is. It’s not funny because it’s something you would expect someone to think. It’s even strange to think it. Yes, it is even stranger to say. But the character is ‘loose’, proverbial loose cannon. He is teetering on the edge of his own destruction and everyone’s destruction (lit cigarette, inappropriate attire for a low class place like Family Express - he does not have a family, if he does...he doesn’t care...he is ready to die if it should take him...but he is acutely aware of the outer dangers). Stranger in a strange land. The line itself is like a movie line. Bordering cliche. Think of a modern Dr. Gonzo.

>>14006293
And to add, you can extrapolate these qualities from an image: slicked back blonde hair, open buttons, eyes off what he is doing, high energy, alert yet wearing shades, lit cigarette, family value. The writing adds flourishes (Sweet Dreams Are Made of These) that gives us a night-core vibe. As we read it we laugh first at his situation, his acute absurdity and insanity, and then the writing again throws us for a humorous loop by adding words like “merited”. The world is insane and he is what it takes to survive in it.

>>14004489
There's nothing wrong with pumping gas with the car running

>>14004439
damn i wish i was a mature as u

>>14004439
>>14004429
1) the image is already funny
2) the idea that his unusual body language is due to the fact that he is an obsessive paranoid racist is funny in an absurd and unexpected way
3) the authorial reaffirmation of his racism ['(merited)'] is funny in a self aware and ironic way
4) the last line is funny because it superficially resembles something an action movie hero might say (which ties in with the cinematic qualities of the image) but its actually a very banal and weird statement to say (emphasized by the author with the narration 'to himself, out loud') - again this relates to the image because we might reasonably speculate that the man pictured is a somewhat abnormal person.

>>14004439
because it just fits so absurd, yet it somehow fits perfectly

>>14006077
Fair. Experimentation is encouraged, but if you're doing acid and watch a nature documentary or psycadelic patterns or post a trip report on /r/drugs you're probably dun fucked up. I wouldn't consider doing acid or any other psychadelic for personal growth reasons "recreational"

Dude! the n word! Fricken epic

>>14004439
Well here's the thing about that
N

>>14006452
this

>>14004429
Every time I hear Sweet Dreams I think of this shitty meme now

>>14004429
>>14004439
The original image complete with the Facebook caption is great; but that little excerpt which people love to post with it is just a joke that’s been told too many times now. It was never very funny to begin with either. Every time I read it I cringe thinking about how juvenile you’d have to be to still enjoy this image. The epicly Hunter S Thompson-esque vibe, the oh so hilarious yet oh so naughty ‘nigger’, the completely inane but devilishly (yet painfully self-conscious) ‘cool’ quote at the end. I imagine the people that still enjoy it are mostly incels, people that have their Twitter profile picture as a Classical statue of Zeus or Hercules, or people that are still reading the entry-level /lit/ reading list. I don’t mean to be snobbish, but please find a better joke. The people that post this are far more Reddit than the people who no longer enjoy it.

>>14006452
cringe. grow up.
>im older than 21
extra cringe. read more

>>14006314
Don’t attempt to analyse a text ever again, it’s like watching a monkey try and complete a sudoku

>>14006867
>>14006873
very reddit posts

>>14006867
Imagine tieing your identity to hating a four chan macro image picture file

>>14004429
The last line is funny because you read it in a super confident tough guy voice in conjunction with the picture, and it's almost something a cool counterculture hero says but it's also a basic self evident observation. The stupidity of the line adds to him being 'based' because an important aspect of being based is being grounded and libidinal.

>>14004439
It's cute how many leftists have started trying to mask their offense at any and all edgy humour with "Lol that's just boring/easy"

>>14006877
No he's completely right

>>14006879
>>14006881
See, it’s actually the other way round. Here I am shooting down this image that’s worshipped by you midwits and reminding you all that every meme is transient, you can’t keep it going for ever. I’m the natural reaction, the bacteria, the necessary force that keeps the board in balance. If there wasn’t posters like me, you’d still be posting groyper and bugs. Show some respect.

>>14006452
based

>>14006895
>No he’s completely right

>>14006867
>>14006897
based, fuck this reddit meme

>>14006897
no u

>>14006910
reddit reply