/lit/ - Literature

>>15038118
Most works by Schopenhauer
>>15038194
But also this

>>15025075
>burgerpunk has no cool guns
I can tell you've never been to Burgerstan

>>13597181
Me too.

>>13270992
>The World as Chill and Recreation
kek

>And God has favored some of you above others in provision. Those who have been favored do not hand over their provision to those whom their right hand possess, such that they would be equal in this regard. Would they thus reject the blessings of God?

Qur'an 16:71 (translation by The Study Quran)

This Surah in general describes how God has established the natural order. This verse in particular (actually a theological point that God should not be made equal with his slaves, such as Jesus) is a good illustration of how the Qur'an supports a form of master morality rather than slave morality, which is why Nietzsche loved it but Schopenhauer hated it. Some will argue that Submission (what Islam means) is slave morality, but slave morality is about resenting strength and power because you are an impotent weakling, it has nothing to do with submitting to gods. In fact resenting God is slave morality.

Keep in mind of course that master morality is not amorality, it does have a strong moral sense. In Islam slaves are to be dressed and fed as well as their masters and to be freed if they are good and wish to work for it. Here is an account of Islamic slavery by T.W. Lawrence, from The Seven Pillars of Wisdom,

>Their work was hard, but the supervision loose, and escape easy. Their legal status was bad, for they had no appeal to tribal justice, or even to the Sherifs courts; but public opinion and self-interest deprecated any cruelty towards them, and the tenet of the faith that to enlarge a slave is a good deed, meant in practice that nearly all gained freedom in the end. They made pocket-money during their service, if they were ingenious. Those I saw had property, and declared themselves contented. They grew melons, marrows, cucumber, grapes and tobacco for their own account, in addition to the dates, whose surplus was sent across to the Sudan by sailing dhow, and there exchanged for corn, clothing and the luxuries of Africa or Europe.

> those that can be verified or falsified on the basis of observation, or sense experience (empirical claims)
> those that are true or false simply by virtue of the conventional meanings assigned to the words they contain along with their logical implications.

Anything excluding these two things is literally useless. What do you do now?

Do you ever read forewords not written by the author?
I sure don't

>>13005670
(not that anon, but am also curious for a cleaner rundown since you're already here)

My understanding is that within the framework of g/acc (and really in pretty much every branch, tree and trunk of feminism) that certain traits are ascribed to the masculine and the feminine. In the blackpaper, diverse and decentralized creation, "the productive space from which the future is produced" appears to be a primary feminine trait, whereas masculinity has a sort of top-down, almost single-purpose, stilted hierarchical nature to it - the multics vs. unix section is quite good at displaying some of these basis for this separation/delineation of traits and why the feminine won out in the given example.

I could probably parse out a few more trait-distinctions between masculine and feminine if I went through the paper explicitly looking for them, but I was wondering if you could provide a sort of rough outline of what you think some of the essential masculine and feminine traits are within the context of g/acc. That might help as a background for explaining why certain traits (the feminine) will win out over others (the masculine) as capital/technology/the world at large progresses and accelerates.

Thanks!

it's a cycle not a phase. you're in for it now bub

>>12937070
I also wouldn't assume your brain is fucked before it actually is. I don't know the nature of your condition, but it would be foolish to assume you'll have the exact same outcome as your sibling. Just remember, /lit/ is a place to elevate yourself above life and death and gain new perspective, as well as shitpost memes about pigs. Just know you got support here. We may be retarded faggots, but we are also hella woke nigga

Is /lit/ really smarter than everyone else? There may be retarded faggots running rampant on this board, but at its core is a group of people who at least try to be informed, both on the topics of philosophy and lit. I just had an experience which made me think about this.
I recently joined the writing club at my university. It's a fairly good school so I expected at least some similar minds. Lo and behold I get there and 90% of the club is girls writing magical world fantasy bullshit devoid of any originality. I'm not trying to be some elitist saying all stories have to be inspired by Neo-Schopenhauerian-absurdism, or any other equally esoteric philosophy; there isn't anything wrong with just making a fun story. But a very small minority of people were actually trying to make something truly special, or understood the philosophical implications of what they were writing. Am I just in my own league above these people, or am I just being a pompous ass? Anyone have similar experiences?

why is everyone on /lit/ a low-T faggot?

>>11080510
t. Schopenhauer

>>11068083

>>11013852
giving money to organizations that publish the books i'm interested in allows them to continue publishing future books, following my tastes because they're incentivized to
those who steal books, particularly niche titles (because major works like the bible won't go out of print, nor will a future better bible be produced despite of my willingness to pay for one) act against their interests