/lit/ - Literature

Nietzsche is for children

children are for dinner

>>19372345
myths and stories apprehend reality indirectly enough for us to perceive truths we would never perceive directly.

>>19372356
Silly rabbit

>>19372380
Spoken like a true child
>>19372364
Ah, I see youve been reading non fiction and now understand the truth

>>19372387
I predict you are going to avoid talking about any work of fiction in particular

>>19372422
No i will but i do sincerely mean ALL of them. If you want to make a case that this doesnt apply to a paricular work of fiction, ill hear you out and likely argue against you

>>19372345
Cool story bro

>>19372429
I had sex with your dad
Thats non fiction

>>19372424
It won't make a difference unless you define your terms. By childish, you mean "does not resonate with reality"? Correct? In what way do literary esthetics fail to address reality, much like childhood fantasy? You can demonstrate this by giving some examples of motifs you're familiar with from books you've read.

>>19372345
I have a 413 IQ, have out-thought Friedrich Nietzsche, and I watch cartoons like The Ghost and Molly Mcgee, or the Loud House

https://pastebin.com/Y2vDggXq

>>19372422
All fiction is utter garbage. I refuse to elaborate further. Goodbye

>>19372345
R E T A R D
EE
T T
A A
R R
D D

>>19372539
get off my board, mongoloid

>>19372518
No i mean developmentally stunted by it

>>19372578
why are they developmentally stunted by fiction?

Nonfiction is for sexless incels. There. I said it. I know you don't like it, but I had to say it.

>>19372601
No, not by fiction itself. I meant that I was defining childish as developmentally stunted, with regard to the question you were asking me.

>>19372603
I strictly read non fiction and came inside of my gf last night

>>19372618
>disapproving_schopenhauer.jfif

>>19372345
Why do you post Nietzsche like he would agree with your ridiculous and stupid ideas? His most famous book is literally fiction.

>>19372690
Because he would

>>19372684
Schopenhauer was a straight up whore who fucked mad bitches.

>>19372618
Exceptions don't make rules. As a fiction reader, I've fucked near a hundred women and come inside about half of them

>>19372754
Your post is the only work of fiction ive read in the past ten years

>>19372345
Ok, After reading a lot of books (most of them are fiction) I began to crave non-fiction books, but I dont know where to start
>in4 "start with the greeks" fagoot

could you recommend me come GOD-TIER non-fictional reads???

>>19372345
Self indulgent self improvement for the sake of it isn't a virtue.

>>19372345
What if I read fiction to achieve proficiency in foreign languages?

>>19372892
Yes it is literally the definition of virtue

>>19372885
Nietzsche
Everything by him
>>19372896
Pretty gay but not as gay as what im saying in OP so youre good

I read about 100 or so novels by the time I was about 15, and yeah by that time I was very bored of fiction and I mostly stopped.
I've only read a handful of fiction books since all those years ago.

>>19373008
Exactly my man. Welcome to Hyperborea

>>19372892
what a retard. always amuse me the level of retadation in this boards

>>19372953
ok and besides Nietzche what else? that men is kinda boring.

>>19372345
You're aware that Nietzsche wrote fiction, right? Zarathustra?

>>19373077
Nothing else kill yourself
>>19373081
Zarathustra is non fiction

>>19372345
this is true, if you consider reading a "difficult" work of fiction to be anything above watching some arthouse film, you're full of yourself. There's nothing wrong with reading fiction, but you aren't above the average film snob. Most people on this board probably already agree with that, but normies seriously think reading Moby Dick makes them some profound deep thinker or scholar. I think some of this has to do with people conflating "reading books" as an activity with seeking knowledge.

>>19373116
>Zarathustra is non fiction
>about a person who is not real who does actions that are not real

>>19373156
Lol, exposing your ignorance
It all happened

>>19372345
i thought this too, but i was wrong and should have been reading fiction this whole time.

>>19372457
based

>>19372538
Didn't read plus if you have an IQ of 413 then you wouldn't pride your self on having an IQ of 413.

People who hate art are hylics and are either brain damaged actual retards or autistic faggots who can’t into more complex abstraction because they are more like computers than human beings

>>19372345
He was filtered by The Shitkickers.

>>19373663
Who said anything about art, or even fiction? Creating art is one of the joys of life. But one who cannot appreciate the abstract in and of itself, aka, the principles which inform the art; its beauty, its resonance, its transcendence, is missing most of the required instruments for creating it.
None of this has been about hating art. It has been about being so mired in the superficiality of art, that one entirely misses out on the depths. Can a lifetime of Harry Potter fanboyism, produce even a Sorcerer's Stone? Likely not, Rowling understands root truths. She is a member of the Craft, after all.

hijacking the thread, is Jung a good read? Nice enough offer on his whole work

>>19373172
>Lol, exposing your ignorance

>>19373717
Ive only ever read bits and pieces but I thought all in all that it was pretty gay. If you read his core archetypal concepts and the main thesis behind why those are valid, like a summary of all that, its good enough and where most of the meat is. Guy was a rambling fuckin sperg so i didnt enjoy his writing. But his ideas are interesting.

>>19373720
>responding to an obvious troll
Dance monkey dance 4 me

>>19373727
A thread already died for this. Nothing better to do than fuck its corpse

>>19373753
Necrophilia is a commonly held trait among adult aged fiction readers

Someone defend the merits of fiction reading before I kms

>>19373792
it passes the time. thread btfo'd

>>19373714
I agree with this post but it doesn’t agree or even reallly address the topic of the thread directly, the creation of art is more impressive than it’s enjoyment, but that doesn’t make art for children. I would say that intellectually mature adults shouldn’t be able to enjoy books that aren’t “true” but lots of fiction is “true” in its beauty and meaning without being about factual events, unless you want to redefine the term “fiction” so that Hamlet, Moby-Dick, or Don Quixote (to pick three works of fiction that express great truth) are non-fiction books.

>>19372345
>intellectual feat; if you continue to believe fiction is "profound
I'll somewhat agree. When you read a fiction book and understand the philosophical references without foot or end notes then you have made it. If you can place the fiction in its historical understanding without Google then you made it. But to avoid all fiction is silly. It's worth escaping reality with a good story.

>>19372345
Damn I was hopping that my love for fiction could be explained by a diagnosis of retardation.

>>19372345
>and treat reading fiction like some rigorous challenging intellectual feat
Nobody thinks this. It is just fun.

>>19374559
Not OP but browsing this site or the internet in general makes me think otherwise.

>>19372345
The people on this board who claim to have "outgrown" fiction are without exception those soulless literal-minded types who never develop an interest in poetry. Plebs, all of them. All the great philosophers read fiction.

>>19372345
Ask me how I know you haven't read N.

>>19374772
Amen
Fuck OP, he's a brainlet faggot

>>19372618
Gross, I hope you used a condom

I like both :^)

>>19372345
The subconscious understands the world through symbols and instinct, the conscious understands reason. If you want a truest deep, visceral understanding of concepts you use both symbolic and logico-formal representations to draw out the meaning.

I banged your mom last night
It was non-fiction.

>>19372345
Weak bait

>>19375495
Maybe but by the disappointment in her eyes this morning I’m guessing it was more like an essay than a novel.

>>19372345
Thus Spake Zarathustra is for children? Cmon man. Fiction is just one way to put forth an ideas. Some ideas come better through in story form, which is why you write it that way.

> hold it in high regard, and treat reading fiction like some rigorous challenging intellectual feat; if you continue to believe fiction is "profound" as an adult, and it is all or most of what you read, youre stunted and are mimicking the development phase of a legit fuckin child.
Stop being children. All fiction books are for kids.

this quote makes me think you are projecting

>>19372345
Indeed, I love when fiction introduces new concepts to the (potentially dumb) public but I hate when it detaches too much from the artistry of the allegory. I appreciate how good the allegory is not what it gives.

I wish I could enjoy fiction, but i don't feel any different when reading it than when I'm watching TV, like it's just filling time.

There is more truth in one line of Spenser or Milton than there is in the entire history of western rationalist discourse. Beauty is the way to Truth. The greatest poets were vessels for the Divine Muse.

>>19372345
I agree this is an aspect of literature, but what about beauty? Why reduce art to nothing more than a vessel for communicating philosophical thought?

Philosophy should be banished from /lit/ to the fiery depths of /his/. We, as fans of literature, are here to discuss literature, not any intellectual or physical 'science'. When we discuss ideas, we ought to do so in a literary mode, approaching them as objects of beauty, subjects of aesthetic contemplation. We are not interested in 'proofs', or in 'facts' (I look upon those as a spinster does a love letter; I've been burned far too many times to take them seriously), but in the art for which man is willing to live and die. A good book is not a mere rhetorical tool, a weapon in the arsenal of rationalist philosophers, but the stuff of life.

>>19372345
>All fiction books are for kids
Someone hasn’t read Nietzsche lol

>>19377011
You cant understand interpretations without depth in philosophy and psychology. Someone didnt understand what Nietzsche meant.

>>19372345
Nietzsche is for manchildren

>>19372356
Nietzsche is for teenagers.

Nietzsche liked Doestoyevski.

>>19377072
>>19377104
Nietzsche is for everyone
>>19377112
Yeah he did. Again, my OP is not saying that fiction has zero value or that you shouldn't read it at all. My point is that without a broader education in abstract concepts themselves, aka, themes themselves, one is stuck in a limited phase of development. Someone who understands themes themselves, aka, philosophy/psychology, sees something deeper when they read Dostoevsky, than someone who is simply approaching these things as "entertaining reads," or even "profound art."

>>19372538
jesus fuck, you're worse than that butterfly tranny

>>19377121
With a “broader education” you merely learn to regurgitate. You recognize certain patterns superficially, because you are familiar with ways to categorize them. What you have “learned” doesn’t belong to you, because it has no organic consistency.

>>19377121
Nietzsche is for toddlers.

>>19372538
>I watch cartoons like The Ghost and Molly Mcgee, or the Loud House
Why?

>>19377049
Nietzsche read and enjoyed novels, such as Stendhal's Le Rouge et le Noir.

>fiction bad thread n.25521
Vote me for president and I'll hire an army of jannies to nuke these on sight.

>>19372345
I read a fiction book and i am done with it, you go through your whole life maintainingbthe fiction that you are clever.

>>19372345
I read nonfiction but a good novel or poem always seems like a better use of my time. Nonfiction feels like escapism but for people with a bad conscience.

hijacking the shit thread with a nice topic, how do i really read philosophy?
I feel like i'm "reading it wrong" so to speak.
>t. getting brainblasted by kierkegaard

>>19377296
Read the words and try to interpret what the author meant. Is there any other way to read?

>>19377298
that's the problem. I'm having a bit of trouble at the moment linking a "whole idea" that's being discussed. I got other authors down reasonably well, but this feels denser

>>19377301
Which Kierkegaard book are you reading?

>>19377309
Irony.

>>19372345
OP is right, with a caveat: some works of fiction have made serious contributions to philosophy, Nietzsche's Thus Spoke Zarathustra is actually one example. Some others would be the Unbearable Lightness of Being and Romeo abd Juliet. But by and large, fiction is didactically strictly inferior to non-fiction, and I wonder if even in these examples the claims could have been made better in non-fiction.
Fiction's main use should be as intuition pumps for philosophical positions. This is why the classically trained criticism of "low" art as using recycled themes falls hollow - there is rarely ever anything in fiction that's new, the ebic canon that English professors fawn over very much included.

>>19377388
>abd
*and

Why can you not then say all non-realist art is for children?

>>19377420
I don't think I used realist correctly but you know what I mean

>>19372345
>introducing concepts through allegory
This is not even limited to fiction though, nonfiction does this all the time. You have no idea what the fuck you're talking about do you?

>>19372345
Philosophers are drawn to their field instead of the arts because they're talentless hacks.

>>19372618
Hey I came into your gf last night too

>>19372892
these retards don’t even follow through with it anyways. they post shit like this then go jack off and fall asleep without brushing their teeth

>>19378218
non fiction does it with greater detail and without the flowery words

>>19377388
>Some others would be the Unbearable Lightness of Being and Romeo abd Juliet.
Explain yourself

>>19372356
Nietzsche gets better every decade you age, and he changes a lot in that time

>>19379792
Why is this necessarily true?

>>19372356
Absolutely based bait. fpbp, I congratulate you. Nietzschefags who bit this bait haven't even read Nietzsche

>>19379792
Since when is philosophy known for clarity? Have you ever tried reading Hegel, Kierkegaard, or Heidegger?

>>19381395
Have you tried reading Schopenhauer, Voeglin and Schiller?

I decided to read some Nietzsche and I picked "thus spoke zarathustra" because it's arguably his best-known work and boy did I make a wrong choice
The format he chose is so obnoxiously pretentious and needlessly obfuscates his message. It feels like he thought it would be cool to imitate the way ancient religious texts were written, for example the Bible. I feel myself get genuinely annoyed by the fuckin format, it's like he's cosplaying as some mythical religious figure, I want to punch him. I dont have a problem with what he's saying, it's how he's saying it

I hope his other works have him speaking his mind without the needless decorations?

>>19372345
Reading philosophy is reading CliffsNotes because you don't understand art and can't interpret life for yourself unless it's dissected by a nerd and starkly laid out in front you

>>19377072
Manchildren? What gives you that idea?

Absolute pseud thread. Fiction shows us ways of thinking that can change our internal meta.

>>19372356
guaranteed replies

>>19372356
fpbp. Nietzsche faggots BTFO

Anyone that posts on lit anything at least related to Nietzsche to look smart has either been filtered by his books or hasn't read him.

>>19372345
I do not read fiction anymore. At all.

>>19383205
what do you read now instead?

>>19383245
Philosophy, books about medical, scientific subjects. Religion.

don't agree with OP but I've reached a point I can barely read fiction anymore.
Just can't seem to get into anything anymore.
last fiction I read was crime and punishment and libra like two years ago.

>>19372457
and now you just got AIDS from him congratz :)

>>19372768
i exhaled strongly through my nostrils

>>19381565
no, only germans can read nietzsche, all translations suck. I am not ironic here, you can not read nietzsche as non native german speaker, it is too difficult, the artistic expression and heraclitean madness gets lost

>>19383956
bro they are just ideas bros it's not that deep.
In your heart of hearts you know that ship has sailed for Germans.

>>19374559
>>19374743
I think it happens pretty often yeah. Some people will read like all of Proust just for the feeling of accomplishment.

>>19377296
Secondary sources, annotated copies, etc. Probably even videos and such

>>19382771
Factual. Fiction is based.

>>19372364
>Implying to drink children's blood
Are you a kike?

>>19372345
>Not realizing that the only difference between Fiction and Non-Fiction is state acceptance

Fo' Shiggy my diggy.

>I don't read fiction
>What do you read?
>I read about sky daddy!
I too have herped the derp, fellow traveler.

>>19372345
Every piece of fiction is just a hypothetical reality. You already engage with hypothetical realities when you anticipate the consequence of every choice you make, so you constantly invent fiction for yourself every day even if you don't want to.

>>19384831
you do not read nietzsche due to the ideas, that can be derived from reading the ones who became "nietzschean" or some articles, you read it for the prose. it has a meta-value due to the un-restricting style and him never giving a fuck what he wrote before. if someone tells me nietzsche is not bla bla bla because he wrote this and that, it tells me he has not understand a thing of what nietzsche was trying to do.

translating uber-mensch into super-man
translating biederkeit (i dont even know a word for that in english)
it is like if you would want to encompass an eskimo/inuit poem, they have 20 words for snow, dont they?
then they talk about the word they have for the snow that you have just pissed on, and you translate it with yellow snow, because that is what it is, but they have a unique connotation for "snow that has become yellow due to being pissed on" and it can not really be translated.

and nietzsche did not even like the germans, i dont like my countryman, he is very onpoint when he calls them a nation of dyspeptics who can not digest anything, obvious with the self flagellation of muh nazi crimes 70 years later. the japanese don't do this, the uk does not do this, no fucking country does it, because the inability to "digest" is an inherent german feature.

it simply lacks the nuances, the connotation of the words is different. the same can be seen in discussions about buddhism.

>>19386902
>they have 20 words for snow, dont they?
It's a myth

>>19386916
seems 50% true.
but there are words in german that are not translateable into english, biederkeit, spießigkeit, unaufrichtig. there are simply no words in english that fit.
just like nobleman is not a good translation for "gentleman", we do not have a word for "gentleman" in german.

>>19372345
>Babys first thinking guide.

You have it all backwards. Reading philosophy is literally reading thinking guides for retards. People who can already think for themselves can instead relax and read some comfy fiction.

>>19383956
Isn't that the case for almost all philosophy?

>>19388449
yes.

>>19386936
>we do not have a word for "gentleman" in german
and it shows desu

>>19372345
Based

>>19372345
I forgot why I stopped browsing /lit/ for a while

>>19386656
>/thread/

>>19372356
Based and beyond the camel and the lion

>>19372345
I fucking wish this was ironic

>>19372345
Yet Nietzsche loved greek tragedies

>>19372345
this but for being monolingual. If you're monolingual you're essentially a child.

>>19373792
It can be a vehicle for philosophic ideas, it can inspire and it is one of the most important humanistic things in our existence (similar to music).

What did the ancients do around the fire; they sang, they danced and they told stories.

>>19381565
> obnoxiously pretentious
Your projection your emotional hangups onto the author have nothing to do with the merits of his work. Fact.

Now go ahead and senselessly rage.

>>19372345
Reminder that only autistic people read non-fic outside of school. Normal people go out there and experience life

>>19372345
Only npc's frown upon fiction, it's way more nuanced then muh intellectual labor, putting fiction upon a pedestal as such, most people shouldn't learn to read at all, like op

non fiction is only of worth if it is a retelling of historical facts and includes commentary from the various people involved so as to see a variety of perspectives regarding said historical event. philosophy is for the dull brained who enjoy gossip.

>>19372345
Nietzsche is very much pro-fiction. Why do people on this board taut writers or philosophers they do not read nor understand?