[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 86 KB, 750x726, 1611135421391.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17611723 No.17611723 [Reply] [Original]

Is it worth trying to read him?

>> No.17611730

>>17611723
No. Clean your room instead and read the Bible

>> No.17611759

>>17611730
Even though I generally agree with the idea of figuring out your own life first and setting that straight before setting out to change the world (and Zizek agrees, as it happens), I still find Peterson mainly to be a hack.

>> No.17611760

>>17611723
if yo read he, most probably you will never shower again

>> No.17611766

>>17611723
Maybe you'll get to fuck some arthoe by namedropping him but like every other Marxist thinker his work is completely useless in real life

>> No.17611781

>>17611766
Actually in my experience it's the gays that love him more than art hoes --- unsurpisingly I should add.

>> No.17611804

>>17611723
How hard could he be? Somebody post excerpts and let's wildy speculate on what that passage means

>> No.17611810

>>17611804
Fookall is the easiest pomo to read

>> No.17611831

Read Discipline & Punish, it's a good read.

>> No.17611847

>>17611723
I don't know where the meme of Foucault being hard to read came from. I always thought he was very readable. Discipline and Punish is like pulp.

>> No.17611859

>>17611723
Imo the order of things is the best starting point. I liked his lectures on biopower the most

>> No.17612343

>>17611759
because he is. try reading maps of meaning with a straight face. warning: you cant

>> No.17612352

>>17611723
no, read Karl Popper's "Poverty of Historicism" instead.

>> No.17612360

>>17612352
>Pooper

>> No.17612369

>>17612360
>inb4 (((Popper))) memes
what's wrong with popper?

>> No.17612949
File: 1.44 MB, 292x292, charls.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17612949

>>17612352
>Karl Popper

>> No.17613017

>>17611766
>Foucault
>Marxist
/lit/, where Foucault is a Marxist and Nietzsche is a Postmodernist

>> No.17613024

>>17611759
Zizek also said... your room is a reflection of society

>> No.17613035

>>17613017
N also a nihilist lol... but yeah nobody here reads. neither do I but I at least know more than zero

>> No.17613036

>>17612949
>>17612360
No one can tell me why popper is bad?

>> No.17613047

>>17613036
Imagine being a popper lmao

>> No.17613476

>>17611723
Watch his retarded arguments against Chomsky on human nature and decide for urself

>> No.17613490

>>17611723
I'm afraid to read him..I know it is silly, but I keep thinking it will take me down a slide that has no bottom.

>> No.17613555

>>17611723

What's the worth of reading the books of a gay, sadomasochistic schizo Marxist who died of aids and is critical in influencing one of the most vacuous, retarded schools of thought in history (Wokeism)?

This guy was heavily influenced by Marquis de Sade just so you know.

>> No.17613574

>>17611766
I thought he was fascist

>> No.17613721

>>17611723
Do you enjoy being on /lit/? If so, then no, solely because Foucault serves as a perfect example of how nobody here reads, yet everyone talks as though they do. You'll see that postmodernists aren't the spooky scary bugmen that /lit/ pretends they are, but they aren't the earth-shattering great minds that /lit/ also pretends they are. You'll be forced to come to terms with the fact that this board is a great wall of pseuds, desperate to maintain the mediocre status quo of pretending that /lit/ used to be better but it's still the best board.
But yes, Foucault is probably the easiest postmodernist to read, his work is generally enjoyable, and you can get to see some terminology that's thrown around online (especially in Twitter's faux leftist circles) be used properly.