/lit/ - Literature

>>2037914

It's more like you should actually use your major as a skill or soemthing like that while a minor should be a hobby, like doing puzzles.

For me my major is Fine arts and Photography, because that is an actual skill, and my minor is Philosophy because it is more of a hobby so I can find out how to live my life, but I'm thinking about dropping it because they don't cover stuff that isn't white and male, like black philosophy and eastern philosophy, or feminine philosophy.

I don't know enough about your majors to comment. But history is kind of another useless hobby.

Some people can write and some people can't, obviously you weren't cut out to be a writer from the sounds of things. I'm sorry to say it, but we can't all be writers. Some people just are not cut out for it.

What does your nonsense sentence have to do with Shinto?

>>2037894

If he knew anything he would know to choose a different major.

As Wittgenstein says, philosophy is simply a bunch of linguistic puzzles with no actual coronary to anything but itself. It may be fun as a hobby but it isn't much more than that.

I think that we would be much better off if we simply all came up with our own different ways of living our lives without the assistance of dead white men.

>>2037847

But I'm in my third year of college? what a loser.

Wasn't Wittgensteins main idea like, that all philosophical problems are merely linguistic puzzles and nothing more?

But that couldn't be right, because if that was true then why would people study it!?

Isn't that as productive as studying a crossword puzzle? or a Sudoku?

>>2037853

Why don't you start a D&E lecture thread where you enlighten all of us to your philosophical knowledge? They say the best way to better understand material is by teaching it to other people.

>>2037827

I don't understand what you are implying, but at least admit that I defined post-structuralism correctly.

>>2037794
Welp thats what I think it is, and I've taken Philosophy 202, so I know more than you!

>>2037780

That is how you would apply it to Lit, but obviously it is a philosophical idea and you can take the concept and attach it onto whatever subject you want, with some pretty interesting implications.

>>2037761

His basic concept is deconstruction.

The concept can be broken down as follows.

1. Structuralism, (tl;dr the idea that there is one correct meaning to be found in a text) is wrong.

2. Derrida asserts that there are multiple meanings within the text to be found.

3. Not only that, but you can always find evidence to contradict whatever meaning you are trying you argue.

4. So the texts always contradict themselves.

5. So to put Deconstruction into practice, I would take a popular interpretation of say Moby Dick, and then I would find evidence in the text that contradicts the other guys interpretation to piss off some other Critic. So basically you are trolling other critics.

Derrida was also a major troll because he dressed up this very simple concept in a way to make it unreadable to make his ideas seem more complex than they actually were.

>>2037748
In america there is at least one library in every county (80 counties per my medium sized state). In my county there are two public libraries and I live in a less than 20k people-small town in the middle of nowheres ville.

>>2037742

It is good writing, but I just don't like the guys viewpoints on issues.

>2011
>paying for books

Sunhawk your such a card!

This is my favorite by far.

Derrida is a dumbass, and his point is so simple it can be summed up in about a paragraph, any prof worth anything would have to wonder how the fuck they are going to do an entire class on just him. That's a bit of overkill. The idea isn't even that great.

>>2037701

This, Dickens is just plain bad. I don't see how anyone can enjoy his shit.

Nice, they had some stuff that bookz and library.nu don't have! Awesome find!

>>2037603

Wow you are a dumb piece of shit, way to throw away a full ride scholarship because baby can't handle the high school level math classes they make you take.

You are a waste of space.

This was hilarious. If he actually claimed he was going to pay I would totally ghost write his garbage for him!

That is one sexy pic OP

Vonnegut is such a bad writer. I don't like anything the guy has written.

I read Slaughterhouse Five, skimmed Cat's Cradle, got halfway through Bluebeard, his Dr.Kevorkian thing was TERRIBLE, his book a man without a country can be summed up in one sentence 'bush is gay lols',

I REALLY want to like the guy I really do, but he just fucking sucks!

I'm going to give him one last shot with Breakfast of Champions and if it sucks then I'm going to punch the next person that recommends me or gives me a copy of this shit.

lol Dawkins in God tier, just a little to obvious for my tastes.

Also, >>2037509
This is why these lists are basically useless, because none of you morons has ever bothered to read any of these philosophers, or even taken a single course on the subject.

You will hate the book. It has absolutely nothing to do with the film lol. The film and the book could not be more different.

You just wasted your money.