/lit/ - Literature

>>6626325

As much as I think Hume could be an actual atheist, many intellectuals who raised doubts of "atheism" weren't atheist in a modern sense, Hobbes being a good example.

>>6626114

Only Roman Catholic Church. Polish Catholic Church is almost non-existent here and its origins are close to Anglican schism, simply utilitarian purposes.

>>6626160

First of I'd appreciate if you marked that you reply to both our comments because I almost overlooked yours.

>Beauty that comes at the expense of faith and good works

False premise, often used by protestants who simply cannot comprehend that it's not a zero sum game. Worldly beauty serves the didactic purpose in trying to emulate and reflect the beauty of faith and the very spiritual realm. It's not chaining yourself to this world. Christianity is not a Manichean, flesh-denying cult. Much of the Old Testament is a "testament" to the value of aesthetic experiance in life of a believer even if it's also a reminder that faith and grace are superior to it. The point is that we don't need to sacrifice one for the other.

Matthew 26:7

>"Now when Jesus was in Bethany, at the home of Simon the leper, a woman came to Him with an alabaster vial of very costly perfume, and she poured it on His head as He reclined at the table. But the disciples were indignant when they saw this, and said, "Why this waste?… For this perfume might have been sold for a high price and the money given to the poor." But Jesus, aware of this, said to them, "Why do you bother the woman? For she has done a good deed to Me. "For you always have the poor with you; but you do not always have Me."

This passage much better reflects the attitude the Scripture has towards money spent on giving glory to God by creation of something aesthetically pleasing to senses. Passage quoted by you refers to a private life of a rich man and his private property. These two are different conducts in different contexts.

PS Taking into account my Polish time zone I may not be able to reply forth as I have to go to college soon, but /lit/ is a slow board so if you'll write anything else I'll try to adress it later during any boring lectures.

>>6626134

A little clarification. Century was an overstatement, more like half of it, especially after Stalin's purge and the post-war period.

>>6625973

I guess you missed a century of puritan, almost conservative socialism practice behind The Iron Curtain. I'd ask if you also think that Zizek is a joke being a socialist who despises liberalism, but he sort of is.

>>6626008

You were close. Gottlob Frege. Taking into account significance of logic in analytic school I can agree with the quote as long as we remain within said school of thought.

>>6625863
>superfluous to the performing of sacraments and worship

While it is superflous to performing sacraments, it's not superflous to the practice of worship. Aesthetic experiance upon entering such church influences people greatly in their prayer, feeling of being drawn to the spiritual realm and convicion of worship's significance. It serves didactic purposes, ad maiorem Dei gloriam. Not only that, but aesthetic quality is desirable by its own essence of aesthetic virtue (on ethical dimension).

Remember the washing of Jesus' feet with jar of alabaster perfume? Judas also had doubts if that was a moral conduct on woman's part, suggesting it would be better to sell the perfume and give money to the charity.

>>6625930

>Poland

Not being a Catholic here is a criminal offence.

Intelligent philosophers who focused on atheism disappeard with likes of Ayer and Russell. Among contemporary ones there are few bright ones who also happen to atheist, but they don't focus on this issue. Much like Christian philosophers to be honest. Milbank is actually quite intelligent though.

>>6625761

Damn, that's a runner up.

>>6625744

That's a roccoco, high baroque style. I can't see why would you deem it to be decadent. It's also my academic church nearby University of Warsaw with 2 centuries old pipe organs accompanying every service.

>>6625724

This is kind of critique I was talking about here >>6625456

If the meme about Diogenes mocking Plato's forms by asking about the form of cup-ness and then about form of emptiness of the cup is real (which I'm not sure of because there are no credible sources of it in Laertios' works) then it shows that Diogenes didn't understand that theory of forms was applicable only to positive concepts thus excluding "form of emptiness".

You must gather your book collection before venturing forth.

>>6625602
>>6625521

And here's exterior with our beloved papa.

>>6625521

I don't think it gets much better than my church. Here's interior.

>>6617447

That's the case with quite a few philosophers, even the brilliant ones. You read them for methodology of thinking, even if they in the end tend to reach wrong conclusions.

Plantinga's take-on on complex ontology is a quality intellectual exercise and worth reading, even if in the end as you said his conclusions are wrong (i'd rather say incomplete).

>>6625300

"Every good mathematician is at least half a philosopher, and every good philosopher is at least half a mathematician."

Who said that? Only mode: no google

>>6625412

Fair enough, that may be a valid complaint. Also I wish I could help you with translation, but I read Lermontov in Polish so I guess it wouldn't be of much help. I also forgot Pushkin, however same thing you've written possibly applies to him in English what is a damn shame.

Plato's critique annoys me like nothing else in philosophy. I've seen people two weeks into philosophy, just >starting with the greeks and who already are like "Plato? Theory of forms is dumb lel :D"

People can't even argue against it properly and overlook the fact that is anticipates 20th century psychological theories about collective unconscious or rather collective implication of shared understanding of things which naturally can't be popular in era which tells us most things can only be ethically judged within certain perception shaped by cultural factors etc. as if accepted (even only in shape of Jung's collective unconscious), big part of cultural relativism rhetoric would be rendered invalid.

In literary fiction

>George MacDonald (I've seen him discussed once literally)
>Vasily Grossman (never seen him mentioned)
>Lermontov (not enough love for such a great poet)
>Polish Romantics (Mickiewicz, Słowacki)
>Chateaubriand

In philosophy:

>Karl Jaspers (haven't seen a philosopher of his caliber mentioned once, that's really odd)
>Lev Shestov
>Husserl
>Oakeshott possibly (seen him mentioned few times though)

I'm not sure how do you define right-wing extremism? If traditionalist conservatism counts then you have many great authors to choose from philosophy and literature-wise. If it doesn't then I'm not sure, maybe early Emil Cioran, Celine, Giovanni Gentile and folks like that, but traditionally right-wing thought was much more focused around conservatism rather than some obscure reactionary eclectic theory presented by Evola and people I already mentioned.

Exert yourself physically. Best sign up to your college wrestling team or start weightlifting. I'm serious. Healthy body, healthy mind.

First question should be from which position this critique should emerge?

Nozick is a good example of libertarian critique. Frege, Tarsky and Quine were strongly conservative, but they didn't leave much strictly political writings behind. For Marxist critique check Analytic Marxism.

"Pensees" by Pascal. If he's well-versed in philosophy then "Sickness unto Death" by Kierkegaard too. However "Pensees" do the job just fine. If he likes to read then I believe every intelligent person should read "Brothers Karamazov" at least once too.

"The Idiot" is the only underwhelming book I've read by Dostoyevsky. That being said the chapters in which Myshkin has flashbacks from life in Switzerland are top tier. Emotionally stunning are especially parts about the death penalty carried out in some little protestant town and the manner in which a grown man can influence children in a positive, didactic way. Brilliant psychology from Dosto as usual. From what I've read by Dostoyevsky, have in mind it's only my opinion:

Brothers Karamazov > Demons (The Possessed) > House of the Dead = Crime and Punishment > Idiot = Gambler

I still have yet to read Notes from the Underground, Poor Folk and The Raw Youth from his bigger works.

Now, some people may say it's cliche or mainstream, but I genuinly believe that if you have some tenacity and an open mind you'll appreciate Brothers Karamazov. Best book I've ever read for sure.

>skipping any chapters

Without major spoilers; Zosima's retrospection about his brother making peace with himself, God and family is priceless, Zosima's retrospection about his youth and dueling is greatly touching. The trail at the end is perhaps one of best images of rhetorical showmanship in literature and a major political statement. I can't describe the greatness of this book, it's too immense, just go and read it.

I gave a try the first one of Witcher series, mainly because I'm Polish. It starts really promising, but turns out to be mediocre. One thing I can praise it for is consistent dark fantasy climate and prose is okay-ish, but plot is kind of repetitive.

>>6605874

>no George MacDonald on the list

>>6569375

It's Ozymandias who adopted a shitty nametag that you can literally google. "Nobody". Boo hoo.