He is literally me. Post literary characters who are literally you.
>>20375514
>>20375831Yeah i know all these anons saying “not your fault” do not help because you know you have some responsibility, but you can have all the guilt pardoned by believing in Christ “its expediate that one man should die for many”
>>20375514>>20375517>>20375644Have sex
>"hack away you mean red nigger"
>>20375517i have yet to finish this book. he’s just started working at the hotdog cart and then it’s been sitting in my car ever since
Which authors have you come across who are as blackpilled as Schopenhauer?
>>20383454"Life is not worth living">proceeds to live to the ripe old age of 72Explain.
>>20383995the concept of worth is not applicable to life experiences
Schopenhauer attributed civilizational primacy to the northern "white races" due to their sensitivity and creativity (except for the ancient Egyptians and Hindus, whom he saw as equal):The highest civilization and culture, apart from the ancient Hindus and Egyptians, are found exclusively among the white races; and even with many dark peoples, the ruling caste or race is fairer in colour than the rest and has, therefore, evidently immigrated, for example, the Brahmans, the Incas, and the rulers of the South Sea Islands. All this is due to the fact that necessity is the mother of invention because those tribes that emigrated early to the north, and there gradually became white, had to develop all their intellectual powers and invent and perfect all the arts in their struggle with need, want and misery, which in their many forms were brought about by the climate. This they had to do in order to make up for the parsimony of nature and out of it all came their high civilization.[210]Holy shit was Schopenhauer really /ourguy/?
>>20383454Anybody got that quote of his about how women prefer large men regardless of other attributes because intelligence and etc. are more easily corrected than a small and defective physical form? I don't know how I'd search for it.
>>20383477lightweight>>20383995The explanation is on the third essay of the genealogy of morals
I just really love books, brosWe are so blessed
I realised how much better books are than movies when I read the Hannibal trilogy after watching the films and noticed how much material they left out from the novels.
>>20383661Call of the Crocodile
>>20384007Same, I also got exposed to a bunch of older literature from little references Hannibal drops (Milton, Dante, Blake, all the fire and brimstone stuff.) What was your favorite of the books?
>>20384007It's crazy how books can have so much more detail and do things that movies can't and also how books can feel like a lifetime. I remember reading the Hobbit and being amazed at how it literally felt like such a long journey or passage of time had occurred with you in this world, when you've only been in it for a chapter or two. I thought that was so magical.
>>20383904>Yeah, Spanish is pretty ugly.Filtered
Books on urban planning, architecture, interior design, phenomenology of space, etc.
I took a gander and it looks like a pretty good book.
>>20379077>Radical Cities (McGuirk)>Capital City (((Stein)))>Vertical (Graham)>Walkable City (Speck)>Cities Under Siege (Graham)>Extreme Cities (Dawson)>High Rise, J.G. Ballard (fiction)>Private Island (Meek)>A Guide to the New Ruins of Great Britain (Hatherley)>Rebel Cities (Harvey)>All Over The Map (((Sorkin)))>Planet of Slums (Davis)
>>20383117>like that person who made a 6 hour documentary about hidden homosexual propaganda in the media instead of a 6 hour documentary about what people can do instead of sodomizing each otherIsn't informing a positive action?
>>20379077Paul Scheerbart's "Glass Architecture" (1914)A german guy who wrote some interesting sci-fi in the early 1900's but whose ultimate love was Glass architecture. This book is about why every city would be better if every building was glass. It talks a lot about how good sunlight is for you and other benefits of glass buildings.
>>20379138It's cars obviously
Why do we only namedrop books here and never discuss the ideas explored in them and their merits? For example, a lot of people namedrop Houellebecq, yet no one ever discusses the ideas in his books besides vague allusions to muh incels.
>>20381128Yeah but you need to use Netscape to view it, you DO still have an original copy of Netscape right?
>>20379890Because its true?
>>20381375ah shit bro no I dont. I may be able to emulate it through boonty box though.
>>20377508That's just you.
>>20377482just look at whats namedropped. Lit almost exclusively talks about works that are read in at least one highschool around the world and virtually never talks about anything that isn't mentioned enough to be read in a highschool.This proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that this board exists to validate bitches who want to be praised for reading "difficult" authors, and has basically no one who reads "difficult" works just because they like them. If they did read works because they liked them then youd expect to see difficult authors that are completley unknown mentioned just as much as the more popular ones. But instead you basically never see unknown yet difficult authors mentioned, because no one would be able to validate the mentioners greatness.fucking vanity amirite??
We're reading Don Quixote from April 23rd to May 24th. ITT we are approaching the end of Part 1 and beginning Part 2 ITTSchedule:>April 23rd: Start reading DQ Part I; Chapters 1-4>April 24th: Chapters 5-8>April 25th: Chapters 9-12>April 26th: Chapters 13-16>April 27th: Chapters 17-20>April 28th: Chapters 21-24>April 29th: Chapters 25-27>April 30th: Chapters 28-32>May 1st: Chapters 33-36>May 2nd: Chapters 37-41>May 3rd: Chapters 42-44>May 4th: Chapters 45-48Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Chad NEET here, only a few pages left.
>>20379437>events such as the cavehe didn't actually do anything at the cave
>>20380442they are enchanters
The advices Quixote gives to Sancho are not that bad and actually reasonable
>>20383180 wait til they fuck
Is good philosophy the kind that has a nuanced view of life, as opposed to a flat, one-sided view? -------------------------------------------------------------------Every bad philosophy I've ever read had really faulty, one-sided truth claims that didn't account for how nuanced issues of life actually are. But the more comprehensive and full a philosophy was, I tended to agree with it more and see their reasoning.Self-help books are guilty of this a lot, like, "if you just do x, all your problems will go away!" They don't explain their reasoning why doing x is the best choice, nor do they give a complete picture as to why.Whereas a good philosophy would say, "Let us first establish why you would want to do x in the first place. Then let us also consider what other options there are besides doing x. After consideration of the other options, and seeing if x is the most superior, we can now go forward and assume that x is the best choice going forward, and etc."
>>20383753So is the goal then to justify an action as far as you possibly can? Or to justify no actions at all?
>>20383753>>20383922All actions are as justifiable as the action to eat or sleep is justifiable. It is beyond reason entirely. If there is an axiom or circular reasoning here, it is something like this:>I should do what I prefer because I prefer itAnd there is no need to explain this, because why should you? Why explain why you prefer to have a full stomach instead of being hungry? So this is the basis of morality, if there is one. The only thing that ultimately matters is the individual’s preference. The rational aspect of morality is trying to figure out how to satisfy preference in the long term, as opposed to simply doing whatever you prefer in the moment, which is actually what we already do.
>>20383968>The rational aspect of morality is trying to figure out how to satisfy preference in the long term, as opposed to simply doing whatever you prefer in the moment, which is actually what we already do.This is assuming that you care what happens in the future. If you're time preference is really high it's perfectly rational to act only for the moment.
>>20383991the overall goal is to achieve a preferable life, or life + afterlife, or multiple lives, etc. That is, if you had to choose among all the possible lives to live, produced from all the possible choices you could have made, whatever life is the most preferable overall is the most moral one. Whatever life you would choose to live infinitely many times (as opposed to living the others) is the most preferable life. It doesn’t matter what your morals are, if you believe in deontological ethics or Christianity or utilitarianism, it makes no sense to choose the less preferable outcome for yourself, because by definition it is less preferable. To choose the less preferable is a contradiction in terms, or a misunderstanding of your own preferences (ignorance). Of course you can transcend all of this through certain paradigm about desire, free will, etc. One can posit that everything is perfect as it is, that life happens as it should, or that we can only really be content by transcending our preferences altogether. Anyone who has experienced loss of preference can no longer be attached to such a state, and wouldn’t even choose to repeat such an experience. All things are equally preferable.
>>20383666digitsYes I think nuance and multi-dimensional thinking are required features. A map without nuance is simply lacking in detail, which might be good enough or it might be fatally lacking. Multi-dimensional thinking is a sign of maturity since it shows you are not placing one idea entirely above others, but rather championing the entire environment. It shows a willingness to look for other perspectives.
Unironically, what the FUCK was Sula's problem?>In the midst of a pleasant conversation with someone she might say, "Why do you chew with your mouth open?" not because the answer interested her but because she wanted to see the person's face change rapidly.>She had no thought at all of causing Nel pain when she bedded down with Jude.>"[...] Soon I would have torn the flesh from his face just to see if I was right about the gold and nobody would have understood that kind of curiosity.">"Oh, they’ll love me all right. It will take time, but they’ll love me. [...] After all the old women have lain with the teen-agers; when all the young girls have slept with their old drunken uncles; after all the black men fuck all the white ones; when all the white women kiss all the black ones; when the guards have raped all the jailbirds and after all the whores make love to their grannies; after all the faggots get their mothers’ trim; when Lindbergh sleeps with Bessie Smith and Norma Shearer makes it with Stepin Fetchit; after all the dogs have fucked all the cats and every weathervane on every barn flies off the roof to mount the hogs . . . then there’ll be a little love left over for me. And I know just what it will feel like.”
It's spelled SULLA. He was an Optimate faggot who thought his retarded senatorial class could continue to rule over and empire they willingly made without giving the plebs the voice they deserved. He could barely stop Marius and he created Caesar, the undoing of all his work.
>>20383728Not the post I wanted, but the post I deserved.
>>20383784>REEEE NIGGERS REEEEEIs this more what you wanted?
>>20383694Sounds good, might read it
>>20383970I enjoyed it, especially the character Shadrack with his National Suicide Day.
What are some good books about architecture?
>>20382985>ince it has a practical use, a demographic, a necessity transfered into space and materials.then it is not architecture of any worth, but just usefully arranged materials and everything purpose driven for somewhere outside.>Did you learn this at some place or are just your perception of the buildings around you Buildings have no "vibe"Yes, architecture was a frequent point of discussion in aesthetic classes>Post architecture you likeNational Gallery of Art East Building in Washington DC to which I would add the tunnel connecting it to the main building.>inb4 judging it from images on google
>>20382667Give Kenneth Clark's Civilization a watch. It's about a lot more than just architecture but he goes pretty in depth on a lot of great western buildings. Apparently there is a book as well but I haven't read it. The series is all on YouTube.
>>20382682but the second one is beautiful
The map and the territory has some takes on architecture . And it's a very beautifully written book to boot
>>20382719>Architecture is not meant to be entertaining,Entertaining may be the wrong word but it's still meant to be visually pleasing in some way. That's why that modern piece is asymmetrical and has a big curve (if anything modern architecture follows a childish idea that architecture SHOULD be entertaining and is often thought of more as a form of sculpture).Classical architecture, with its focus on details alone, is more visually pleasing and practical than any modern. Where are the nice touches on that building for the human size and perspective? Nowhere.
Rank them
>>20383174They're all equally shit, grow up ya fuckin virgins
>>20383913An anthology of explorations in posthuman fiction. Matrioshka brains and superintellect.
>>20383174Herbert shits on these goons.
>>20383913It's written by this guy. Just imagine what a guy that looks like this would write about and you'll have a pretty good idea of what it's about.
>>20383975I wonder what Greg Egan looks like.
Which writers have the best understanding of human psychology?
>>20381789I'd add Tolstoy to this list.
>>20381195Wagner. There is no work of philosophy that delves so deeply into the paradoxes of erotic love as Tristan and Isolde, no work of Christian theology that matches Wagner's exploration of the Eucharist in Parsifal, and no work of political theory that uncovers the place of power and law in the human psyche with the perceptiveness of The Ring. He is the most influential artist of modern times and works like In Search of Lost Time and Ulysses wouldn't exist without him.Freud also ripped him off.
>>20383972Why was Wagner such a Chad?
>>20381789Proust has a warped sense of human psychology. He assumes that everyone has the same obsessive neuroses as he does.
>>20383976He just was ok?
Give me 1 reason why I should read Stirner or any other trendy post-hegelian
Memes
>Another early homosexual activist influenced by Stirner was John Henry Mackay. Mackay also used the works of Stirner to justify 'man-boy love" and the abolition of the age of consent.Why are all hegelians pedophiles?
>>20383099Sirner's the only Post-Hegelian worth reading. I'm not giving you any reason why because reading him is up to you. He makes me feel cathartic. I can only tell you how I feel but the rest is up to you. Skip around and read whatever interests you.
post art, get a book recommendation
>>20382051This one's spot on for your pic, anonkun
>>20375337Eifelheim by Michael Flynn>>20377072At the Mountains of Madness by HP Lovecraft>>20379593Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro>>20379975The Kreutzer Sonata by Leo Tolstoy>>20382159Diary of a Napoleonic Footsoldier>>20383830Poetic Edda
>>20364192
is there anything comfier?
>>20383228How did I not know about these, I want mtg lands like this
>>20378413Agreed, it’s not as “good”, but the question was “comfy”I’ve lived with dreams of middle earth for almost 20 years, there’s no doubt it has had a greater volume of impact in my life — but I only just got to the space trilogy recently and it blew me away with its seductive imagery. Malacandra’s handramit and Perelandra’s floating islands sound like living impressionism to me. Middle earth is far more grounded, and feels “realer”. It has always been my escape, but Lewis somehow takes me even further away in fewer words. Nowhere near the same scale of worldbuilding, but that’s not how those authors are meant to be compared imo.
Top 5 Characters Ruined by Peter Jackson1. Faramir2. Denethor3. Aragorn4. Merry5. EomerAll of these characters are depicted terribly in Hackson's movies.
>>20383675How was Faramir depicted differently?
>>20383685He had a personality like the others instead of being a static, lifeless golem that blurted out incoherent Shakespeare-speak.
is this really Zane Grey's best book? It is the only book of his that I have read and it's pretty dull.
