/lit/ - Literature

>>8639828
This shit right here

This is where it all started

>>8639887
That's fairly easy to understand. He's saying "Culture makes a man civilized."

Post Hegel.

Why do so many philosophical texts have to borderline unreadable and intentionally obscure?

>>8639987
It's very rare for a man to be both a great philosopher and a great writer. Most are just one of them.

someone post that Kierkegaard excerpt
you know the one

>>8640004
Gotchu senpai

"I for my part have devoted a good deal of time to the understanding of the Hegelian philosophy, I believe also that I understand it tolerably well, but when in spite of the trouble I have taken there are certain passages I cannot understand, I am foolhardy enough to think that he himself has not been quite clear."

>>8639828

Shit comes from women; shit also comes from men. Therefore, we are all shit.

>>8640004
Man is spirit. But what is spirit? Spirit is the self. But what is the self?
The self is a relation which relates itself to its own self, or it is that in
the relation [which accounts for it] that the relation relates itself to its
own self; the self is not the relation but [consists in the fact] that the
relation relates itself to its own self. Man is a synthesis of the infinite
and the finite, of the temporal and the eternal, of freedom and
necessity, in short it is a synthesis. A synthesis is a relation between
two factors. So regarded, man is not yet a self.

i gave my friend the sickness unto death and he couldn't get past this, which is the first paragraph.

>>8640026
Switch "Relation" with "connection".
The self is a connection which connects itself to its own self, or it it that in the connection that the connection connects itself to its own self; the self is not the connection but that the connection relates itself to its own self.

Seems more intelligible. Might not be entirely accurate, but fuck it.

>>8640004
the self is a self that relates itself to itself to itself to itself

>>8640021
Is this a joke?

>>8640042
Yup. The sentence is in Fear and Trembling though, which makes a nice irony. Kierkegaard jabs at Hegel's prose but has even worse.

>>8640004
Spirit is the self. But what is the self? The self is a relation that relates itself to itself or is the relation's relating itself to itself in the relation;
the self is not the relation but is the relation's relating itself to itself.

>>8640051
Clever

>>8639991
Because you weaker arguments can only be attacked if they are understood. Many philosophers care more about their own reputation and perceived credibility than making an actual contribution to philosophy.

>>8639982
I hope you realize that's a tautology.

>>8640094
Meant to reply to>>8639987

He who has been instructed thus far in the things of love, and who has learned to see the beautiful in due order and succession, when he comes toward the end will suddenly perceive a nature of wondrous beauty (and this, KEK, is the final cause of all our former toils) -- a nature which in the first place is everlasting, not growing and decaying, or waxing and waning; secondly, not fair in one point of view and foul in another, or at one time or in one relation or at one place fair, at another time or in another relation or at another place foul, as if fair to some and foul to others, or in the likeness of a face or hands or any other part of the bodily frame, or in any form of speech or knowledge, or existing in any other being, as for example, in an animal, or in heaven or in earth, or in any other place; but beauty absolute, separate, simple, and everlasting, which without diminution and without increase, or any change, is imparted to the ever-growing and perishing beauties of all other things. He who from these ascending under the influence of true love, begins to perceive that beauty, is not far from the end. And the true order of going, or being led by another, to the things of love, is to begin from the beauties of earth and mount upwards for the sake of that other beauty, using these as steps only, and from one going on to two, and from two to all fair forms, and from fair forms to fair practices, and from fair practices to fair notions, until from fair notions he arrives at the notion of absolute beauty, and at last knows what the essence of beauty is. This, my dear KEK," said the stranger of 4CHAN, "is that life above all others which man should live, in the contemplation of beauty absolute; a beauty which if you once beheld, you would see not to be after the measure of gold, and garments, and fair boys and youths, whose presence now entrances you; and you and many a one would be content to live seeing them only and conversing with them without meat or drink, if that were possible -- you only want to look at them and to be with them. But what if man had eyes to see the true beauty -- the divine beauty, I mean, pure and dear and unalloyed, not clogged with the pollutions of mortality and all the colours and vanities of human life -- thither looking, and holding converse with the true beauty simple and divine? Remember how in that communion only, beholding beauty with the eye of the mind, he will be enabled to bring forth, not images of beauty, but realities (for he has hold not of an image but of a reality), and bringing forth and nourishing true virtue to become the friend of God and be immortal, if mortal man may. Would that be an ignoble life?"

>>8640028
It's a shame, because there's a lot of interesting reflection in Sickness Unto Death when Kierkegaard isn't trying to take the piss out of German philosophy.

>>8640099
Eh, "Culture makes great men while primitivism creates mediocrity" works better for you?

>>8640028

It's a shame that Nietzsche and Kierkegaard never crossed paths. They had more or less the same ideas on a lot of topics and could have been a cool philosophical duo desu.

>>8640137
Nietzsche is atheist pussy Kierkegaard.

Probably the most inscrutable and controversial passage in Aristotle. From De Anima III.5:

>Since in every class of things, as in nature as a whole, we find two factors involved, (1) a matter which is potentially all the particulars included in the class, (2) a cause which is productive in the sense that it makes them all (the latter standing to the former, as e.g. an art to its material), these distinct elements must likewise be found within the soul.

And in fact mind as we have described it is what it is what it is by virtue of becoming all things, while there is another which is what it is by virtue of making all things: this is a sort of positive state like light; for in a sense light makes potential colours into actual colours.

Mind in this sense of it is separable, impassible, unmixed, since it is in its essential nature activity (for always the active is superior to the passive factor, the originating force to the matter which it forms).

Actual knowledge is identical with its object: in the individual, potential knowledge is in time prior to actual knowledge, but in the universe as a whole it is not prior even in time. Mind is not at one time knowing and at another not. When mind is set free from its present conditions it appears as just what it is and nothing more: this alone is immortal and eternal (we do not, however, remember its former activity because, while mind in this sense is impassible, mind as passive is destructible), and without it nothing thinks.

>>8640142

Kierkegaard hated organized religion, and on that he would have agreed with Nietzsche. Likewise, in the Antichrist, Nietzsche does actually admire Jesus - "The last Christian died on the cross", more common ground.

>>8640137
i wish kierkegaard and nietzsche were around now and go on the waking up podcast. 3 geniuses in one conversation. good lord

>>8640152

Nietzsche and Kierkegaard would just spitroast Harris desu.

>>8639828

A marxist post-structuralist continental Ecole Normale Supérieure professor and feminist activist was teaching a class on Martin Heidegger, known hermeneuticist.
”Before the class begins, you must get on your knees and worship Nietzsche and accept that his genealogical method was the most highly-evolved theory the continent has ever known, even greater than Hegel's dialectics!”
At this moment, a brave, rational, positivist analytic philosopher who had read more than 15000 pages of Popper and Wittgenstein and understood the raison d'être of empiricism and fully supported all modern hard sciences stood up and held up the constitution.
"How universal is this text, frenchfag?"
The arrogant professor smirked quite Jewishly and smugly replied “It's not universal at all, fucking positivist, its 'truth' is rooted in our shared understandings about culture, the subject and the nexus of power and knowledge”
”Wrong. It’s been 225 years since human reason created it. If it was not universal, and post-modern relativism, as you say, is real… then it should be regarded as a myth now”
The professor was visibly shaken, and dropped his chalk and copy of On Grammatology. He stormed out of the room crying those ironic post-modern crocodile tears. There is no doubt that at this point our professor, Michel Foucault, wished he had pulled himself up by his bootstraps and become more than an AIDS ridden sadomasochist interested in fisting. He wished so much that he had some kind of truth to hold on to, but he himself had written to disprove it!
The students applauded and all rolled into American universities that day and accepted Wittgenstein as the end of philosophy. An eagle named “Formal logic” flew into the room and perched atop the copy of "Principa Mathematica" and shed a tear on the hardcover. The last sentence of "Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus" was read several times, and Karl Popper himself showed up and demonstrated how dialectics is nothing but a means of justifying contradictions.
The professor lost his tenure and was fired the next day. He died of the gay plague AIDS and his "books" were disregarded for all eternity.

>>8640148

That actually seems pretty clear to me desu?

>>8640154
i imagine if they both read the end of faith and the moral landscape, their views would change dramatically. I think they may both be too intimidated to go on the show if it could happen tb h

>>8640157

>you must get on your knees and worship Nietzsche and accept that his genealogical method was the most highly-evolved theory the continent has ever known, even greater than Hegel's dialectics!”

I think Nietzsche would probably have been affronted to find what these 20th century """"philosophers"""" were doing with his stuff.

>>8640028
Kierkegaard from what I understand is considered to be one of the best writers in the Danish language. This is just pissing on Hegel's garbage writing.

Good writing can be tacitly comprehended even if its whole is lost, poor writing is completely alien for its own sake.

I always really struggled with Aristotle. When I got going though it got better but the initial plunge was extremely frustrating for me.

If, for a while, the ruse of desire is calculable for the uses of discipline soon the repetition of guilt, justification, pseudo-scientific theories, superstition, spurious authorities, and classifications can be seen as the desperate effort to “normalize” formally the disturbance of a discourse of splitting that violates the rational, enlightened claims of its enunciatory modality.

Given the existence as uttered forth in the public works of Puncher and Wattmann of a personal God quaquaquaqua with white beard quaquaquaqua outside time without extension who from the heights of divine apathia divine athambia divine aphasia loves us dearly with some exceptions for reasons unknown but time will tell and suffers like the divine Miranda with those who for reasons unknown but time will tell are plunged in torment plunged in fire whose fire flames if that continues and who can doubt it will fire the firmament that is to say blast heaven to hell so blue still and calm so calm with a calm which even though intermittent is better than nothing but not so fast and considering what is more that as a result of the labours left unfinished crowned by the Acacacacademy of Anthropopopometry of Essy-in-Possy of Testew and Cunard it is established beyond all doubt all other doubt than that which clings to the labours of men that as a result of the labours unfinished of Testew and Cunard it is established as hereinafter but not so fast for reasons unknown that as a result of the public works of Puncher and Wattmann it is established beyond all doubt that in view of the labours of Fartov and Belcher left unfinished for reasons unknown of Testew and Cunard left unfinished it is established what many deny that man in Possy of Testew and Cunard that man in Essy that man in short that man in brief in spite of the strides of alimentation and defecation is seen to waste and pine waste and pine and concurrently simultaneously what is more for reasons unknown in spite of the strides of physical culture the practice of sports such as tennis football running cycling swimming flying floating riding gliding conating camogie skating tennis of all kinds dying flying sports of all sorts autumn summer winter winter tennis of all kinds hockey of all sorts penicilline and succedanea in a word I resume and concurrently simultaneously for reasons unknown to shrink and dwindle in spite of the tennis I resume flying gliding golf over nine and eighteen holes tennis of all sorts in a word for reasons unknown in Feckham Peckham Fulham Clapham namely concurrently simultaneously what is more for reasons unknown but time will tell to shrink and dwindle I resume Fulham Clapham in a word the dead...

>>8640237
...loss per caput since the death of Bishop Berkeley being to the tune of one inch four ounce per caput approximately by and large more or less to the nearest decimal good measure round figures stark naked in the stockinged feet in Connemara in a word for reasons unknown no matter what matter the facts are there and considering what is more much more grave that in the light of the labours lost of Steinweg and Peterman it appears what is more much more grave that in the light the light the light of the labours lost of Steinweg and Peterman that in the plains in the mountains by the seas by the rivers running water running fire the air is the same and than the earth namely the air and then the earth in the great cold the great dark the air and the earth abode of stones in the great cold alas alas in the year of their Lord six hundred and something the air the earth the sea the earth abode of stones in the great deeps the great cold an sea on land and in the air I resume for reasons unknown in spite of the tennis the facts are there but time will tell I resume alas alas on on in short in fine on on abode of stones who can doubt it I resume but not so fast I resume the skull to shrink and waste and concurrently simultaneously what is more for reasons unknown in spite of the tennis on on the beard the flames the tears the stones so blue so calm alas alas on on the skull the skull the skull the skull in Connemara in spite of the tennis the labours abandoned left unfinished graver still abode of stones in a word I resume alas alas abandoned unfinished the skull the skull in Connemara in spite of the tennis the skull alas the stones Cunard (mêlée, final vociferations) tennis... the stones... so calm... Cunard... unfinished...

>>8639828
>This transcendental unity of apperception forms out of all possible
appearances, which can stand alongside one another in one experience, a
connection of all these representations according to laws. For this unity of
consciousness would be impossible if the mind in knowledge of the
manifold could not become conscious of the identity of function
whereby it synthetically combines it in one knowledge. The original and
necessary consciousness of the identity of the self is thus at the
same time a consciousness of an equally necessary unity of the
synthesis of all appearances according to ... rules, which ...
determine an object for their intuition, that is, the concept of something
wherein they are necessarily interconnected. For the mind could never
think its identity in the manifoldness of its representations, and
indeed think this identity a priori, if it did not have before its eyes the
identity of its act, whereby it subordinates all synthesis of apprehension
(which is empirical) to a transcendental unity, thereby rendering possible
their interconnection according to a priori rules.

This passage isn't literally unintelligible, it's a very studied passage in the CPR. But it does show how a philosopher can be an obscure ass sometimes.

>>8639991
Chomsky, Searle, Wittgenstein, Kripke, Kant (I find his writing pretty good actually), and Descartes, are all great philosophers and all easy to understand. Also a lot of the phenomenologists are fairly clear, as are the hermeneutical structuralists; e.g. Merleau-Ponty, Ricoeur, Alfred Schutz, and Peter Berger.

However, post-structuralists, critical theorists, psychoanalysts, literary theorists, and German idealists tend to be incomprehensible. Most of them are shit anyway, so it doesn't really matter.

On the other hand there are also great philosophers that are difficult to understand: Charles Sanders Peirce, Robert Brandom, Husserl, Kierkegaard, etc.

>>8640239
Are you sure it was here?
That we were to wait?

>>8639828
First of all, let me get something straight: This is a JOURNAL, not a diary. I know what it says on the cover, but when Mom went out to buy this thing I SPECIFICALLY told her to get one that didn't say "diary" on it. Great. All I need is for some jerk to catch me carrying this book around and get the wrong idea

I hate this board so goddamn much, I hope you all die of rectal cancer.

how does this make you feel /lit/

>>8640115
That's just bullshit. Mediocrity can only be measured from culture.

>>8640429
Horny

>>8639887
What is this from?

>>8640429
Kek, poorfags need not apply

>>8640183
This is good to know because I dismissed it as nonsense like homies friend did simply because that first passage is unintelligible and doesn't mean anything useful even when you unpack it.

>>8640447
First of all, I was attempting to phrase what the author meant. I was not trying to portray my opinion.
Second, fuck off.

"if a=b and b=c then c=a" like what the fuck?

>>8639887
lol what

>>8640394
in my experience charles sanders peirce is easy and I generally dislike philosophy

>>8640586
It means plenty, I'll try to go through it, but it's one of those things Kierkegaard managed to make awkward like Hegel but still tacit -- you just have to understand it.
>Man is spirit. But what is spirit? Spirit is the self. But what is the self?
Man here is the capital 'M' Man, not the synonym of 'humanity' man; the whole of a person consisting of body and soul.
>The self is a relation which relates itself to its own self
The self is what relates the self to the body (a soul knows its body)
>or it is that in the relation [which accounts for it] that the relation relates itself to its
own self
The self relates the Man to its body (a person knows its body).
>the self is not the relation but [consists in the fact] that the relation relates itself to its own self.
The self is not the relation between the self and the Man (a person may not know their soul).
>Man is a synthesis of the infinite and the finite, of the temporal and the eternal, of freedom and necessity, in short it is a synthesis.
Man is made up of an eternal and needing/needed soul & a free/needed and temporary body.
>So regarded, man is not yet a self.
The body is something in conflict with the soul, due to its own set of wants and needs that may cause one to neglect and even reject the soul because a person more readily knows what their body wants than what their soul wants (indulging in food & drink rather than doing things to enrich the soul).
e.g., food & drink, or sex & drugs, etc.
The person also knows its person more readily than the soul, and may also neglect or reject the soul for the wants and needs of the person (doing things for social or personal [egotistical] reasons rather than doing things to enrich the soul).
e.g., Christendom for the social standing and support of the community, rather than actual devotion.

I don't believe Kierkegaard thinks the body and person should be rejected, but they should not be raised so high that the soul itself starves, or even above the soul; the soul when neglected causing the body and person to sicken and corrupt. A person that neglects their soul may become cold & sociopathic, or may grow to treat people as a sole means to pleasure, or may become wretched; a body that neglects its soul may become unfit & diseased, or as a sole means to further carnal pleasure, or may put said pleasure over its own longevity. The soul is a thing divine and its neglect causes one to fall further and further because the soul is that thing which upholds both the body and person and relates the two to eachother, but because it is a thing divine it becomes a thing neglectable when the person and body can be upheld artificially so easily in the modern age.

>>8639993
Where the fuck that does leap in logic come from between the first and second sentence in the bigger paragraph?? I thought that was going to go in the opposite direction...

>>8640394
>Kant is easy to understand
0/10

>>8641482

Kant's CPR is the finest example of stereotypical German writing you will find. Long, sprawling paragraphs that can go on for as much as a page or more.

With English writers, and writing, you typically can't see the wood for the trees. That is, they focus so much on the particulars (and break their arguments down into so many parts) that at times the 'whole' argument can be lost.

Conversely, with Kant, one sometimes can't see the trees for the wood. That is, he focuses on the 'whole' argument - which occasionally causes the particulars to be lost.

>>8640588
Portray my charles dingus faggot

>>8639982

no, you're way off

>>8640591
no it would be if a=b and b=c then a=c you fucking idiot

>>8639887
He's saying how you access your food affects how you eat it, or more generally your position in an environment affects how you live and view the environment.

So peoples that access already dead animals and have to conserve the meat tend to boil it or similar. People that hunt and have access to the raw meat and are able to be somewhat wasteful will roast it. And smoking is where you want to preserve leftovers or something I forget honestly. Anyway, each part can be argued to be more cultured for different reasons, and people have argued for each corner at different times and places. So roasting needs no recepticle I.e. a cultural artefact, but boiling does.

>>8640137
Brandes even suggested Kierkegaard to Nietzsche right before he went nuts

>>8640051
Soren adopts the dialectic to tear it down throughout his works, read harder

>>8641878
c'mon man learn what an equation is
a = b = c

People keep telling me Heidegger is much easier in German but I find him close to unreadable in my mother tongue (Spanish).

>>8641973
oh.. ok now this makes sense

Tractatus is a very good example.

Especially since the turbo autist realized he was wrong after having spent years upon years disregarding the opinion of anyone that wans't himself.

>>8639975

>not the bloom translation
>subjecting the soul to unnecessary stylistic and interpretative tyrannies
>never gonna uncover the esotericism
>never gonna life that delphic life

>>8640403
>mfw Didi and Gogo should've used Google Maps

>>8639982

I love when idiots try to summarize.

>>8643893

>>8641445

welcome to dialectics. everything but Hegelianism and Marxism will now be vaguely dissatisfying. enjoy