/lit/ - Literature

>The final compound passion is "the amorous passion", i.e. romantic love. It consists of three distinct passions: a sense of beauty, libido, and kindness. These three passions are bound together both by "resemblance" (all have a pleasant sensation) and by "a parallel desire" (all have related motivational tendencies).
>Accordingly, any one of them can end up producing the other two, with beauty most likely to produce the other two (kindness and libido being "too remote" from each other, and beauty "plac'd in a just medium betwixt them").

TL;DR if you didn't win the genetic lottery you're fucked and you will never find love. When even the pseuds you're reading are aware you're a genetic abomination you know it's officially over.

>we have no conception of self because our only sense of self is fictional and based on biased associations
Holy shit...

>extra
>it's miles
>gadgets
>a ardour
>super distinction
an easy writer he was, I'm racking my brains to make sense out of the shit he wrote, but I always end up reading the summary of his epistemological argument on wikipedia because he's such a fucking awful english writer. I hope his ethics will be smoother than the first sections of his work, and I'm saying this as someone who managed to understand more or less the neoplatonists.

Why hasn’t been there no great Anglo philosophers after him? What happened to Anglo s?

Why does this guy receive an immense amount of hate from people here?

If what Hume said is right, causality cannot be logically proved.

Therefore, science, based on causality, is a worthless and unreliable source of information.

Therefore, logic and rationality is self-defeating. A system that relies on logic can't produce anything meaningful.

Therefore, philosophy is worthless.

Only systems of belief that reject logic for emotion, such as superstition (religion) or hedonism (political-economy) can offer us any valuable insight into the world.

>>14920288
Almost as if it's just made up nonsense by a people so lacking in cleverness, that they have yet to discover in-door plumbing and thus continue to shit in the street.

>>14519173
Arguably the most based Chad in the history of Western thought?

>>14504222
>>Be me
>>Hume
>>Oppose subjugating passions to reason
>>Become obese

Explain why it isn't the rightful job of every modern philosopher who touches on a topic Hume did to merely build on the foundations he left behind rather than try and diverge. That is to say, try to point out something in philosophy he wasn't fundamentally correct about.

If I had to define based, that would be him

>>13435111
he was retroactively btfo

>>12847791
Reason is, and ought only to be, slave to the passions.

>*blocks your path*

>>11535826
>we didn't just appear out of nowhere, bro.
Yes we did.

>>11529384
>From my point of view everything requires a source to happen
Just read Hume or at least understand his problem with causality. As we learn more about the universe through science, Hume seems to become even more relevant.

>>11430517
Keep crying.

>Yuum

dave...

easy with the fork

There is nothing wrong with reading the Wikipedia article or secondary sources on a philosopher if you weren't going to critically read and analyze the works themselves in the first place.

>>10996943
>appeal to nature
OH OH OH

>normative ethics

literally oughtism

Why is /lit/ so anti-scientific? Is because you are trying to get a job in a branch of academia that has little to do with science?

Hmmm...kinda makes you feel like a charlatan doesn't it?

Any book recommendations on Meta-Ethics?