/lit/ - Literature

>>18802405
>The speculations of the ingenious Dr. Berkeley--they admit of no refutation, but they produce no conviction
Hume was no idealist

>>17751590
Religion is predicated on moralfaggotry, so I don't see what you mean by this.

Ideally the Greeks, but if you want to fast track it, you can jump straight to the HOOMER

>>16374791
*Ahem*

>"No!"

>>15629378
They literally can't, Hume ended philosophy and anyone that tells you otherwise is lying.

>>14676637
Is that HUME? Does the book refute this?
>I am apt to suspect the Negroes to be naturally inferior to the Whites. There never was a civilized nation of any other complexion than white, nor even any individual eminent either in action or speculation. No ingenious manufacturer amongst them, no arts, no sciences. On the other hand, the most rude and barbarous of the Whites, such as the ancient German, the present Tartars, still have something eminent about them, in their valor, form of government, or some other particular. Such a uniform and constant difference could not happen in so many countries and ages, if nature had not made an original distinction betwixt these breeds of men. Not to mention our colonies, there are Negro slaves dispersed all over Europe, of whom none ever discovered any symptoms of ingenuity; though low people, without education, will [229] start up amongst us, and distinguish themselves in every profession. In Jamaica, indeed, they talk of one Negro as a man of parts and learning; but it is likely he is admired for slender accomplishments, like a parrot who speaks a few words plainly.

Does anybody else get bored reading David Hume? I'm reading him now as I intend to start reading Kant this year, but I just find his writing so dull. Same really with Leibniz, Descartes, and Berkeley, who I've also been reading recently (although none of them particularly closely, besides Descartes). I did however greatly enjoy reading Spinoza, so I'm not sure if this is a matter of me simply being bored by philosophy or not. I haven't started reading Kant yet but my boredom with philosophy lately has gotten me worried about if I'll make it through the critiques. Anybody else have a similar experience?

Who should I read before Hume? I am especially interested in his conception of causality.
Also, does anyone know of any especially good companions?

Literary value is just a particular flavour of fun that certain people like for various reasons, one of them being that it's a more challenging flavour of fun and another one being that it is a more prestigious form of fun, prestige being something enjoyable in its own right.

It's a certain frame that you can opt into if it makes things more enjoyable for you, elitism can be very rewarding for the ego. If it's something that you consider an obstacle you should simple not buy into it.

What matters is if elitism works for you. Ultimately it's all just muh feelsies.

>>7836288
True, in the sense that both aesthetics and ethics come down to 'muh feels'.

>>7827719
>if you were really a nihilist why would you be arguing with people on a Japanese anime forum?
You're assuming human motivation is rational. It isn't.