/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11884652]

>2018
>not taking the pink pill and realizing the irrationality of pessimism

Pssht, get over your cognitive biases, kid.

[Anonymous No.11884656]

>>11884652
this guy is a pansy, a dolt and probably a shill

[Anonymous No.11884658]

>>11884652
ass?

[Anonymous No.11884666]

>2018
>not realizing that rationality is a spook

[Anonymous No.11884681]

>>11884656
(((Pinker))) a shill? No way.

[Anonymous No.11884685]

>>11884656

He could kick Nietzsche's ass, I read it in his book.

[Anonymous No.11884686]

Is this guy like the black science man of psychology?

[Anonymous No.11884688]

>>11884652
>believing in Progress in 2018

is there anything more juvenile?

[Anonymous No.11884691]

i want to punch his face

[Anonymous No.11884710]

>>11884666
>doesn't realize that science, rationality and enlightenment values are directly responsible for his secure standard of living
>doesn't realize that his favorite spook-monger philosopher-hacks wouldn't have been able to come up with their bankrupt ideologies without the material gains of enlightenment to enable them to do so

[Anonymous No.11884724]

>>11884688
>is there anything more juvenile?

believing humanity hasn't made objective, demonstrable progress in such basic things as increasing health, well-being and economic prosperity worldwide

[Anonymous No.11884905]

https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/books/2018/02/unenlightened-thinking-steven-pinker-s-embarrassing-new-book-feeble-sermon

[Anonymous No.11884906]

>>11884724
>life is about being healthy and economically prosperous

Sounds like another neo-liberal drone who wants to reduce everything to numbers. Yu hopeless bastards.

[Anonymous No.11884908]

>>11884652
>thinking word games can encapsulate true tragedy and horror

never gonna make it faggot

[Anonymous No.11884913]

>>11884906
t. juvenile basement dweller

[Anonymous No.11884915]

>>11884685
have his way with his Nazi sister too

[Anonymous No.11884920]

>>11884906
>>life is about being healthy and economically prosperous
this wasn't even close to being implied by the post, anon

[Anonymous No.11884930]

>>11884913
Useless comment. I won't prove myself to you. I'm content where I'm at in life. Are you?

>>11884920
Alright, I'm willing to talk. What was implied? That we're better off than we were 100 years ago because of advances in "medicine," science, and technology? Because that's a tenuous claim, unless you're a neo-liberal who tries to quantify the human experience in markets & numbers.

[Anonymous No.11884939]

>>11884930
Lol, imagine being this idiotic.

>N-NO WE DON'T LIVE ANY BETTER
>A-ADVANCES ARE ONLY RECOGNIZABLE UNDER M-MUH DEGENERATE MATERIALIST WORLDVIEW

Stay juvenile, basementboi.

[Anonymous No.11884961]

>>11884939
What the hell are you even claiming about me? I'm sorry, I spent the night talking to educated people (something I assume you're unfamiliar with), so I may need to adjust myself for these silly "meme-references" that idiots who can't articulately discuss ideas rely upon.

[Anonymous No.11884964]

Debased and upvotepilled.

[Anonymous No.11884969]

>>11884930
Merely that stuff like healthcare and prosperity reduce needless suffering and makes life somewhat better. I don't think anon meant that wellbeing is the meaning of life. For me wellbeing is the strongest position from which you can set out to fulfill your purpose and if more people have it, more people have the potential of a meaningful life, thus the world is better than if more people were too sick and hungry to live.

>>11884939
Ignore this guy that doesn't want to talk.

[Anonymous No.11884971]

>>11884961
Lmao. What ideas, buddy? That the world is not better than a hundred years ago because... people don't believe in God anymore? Our culture is "degenerate"? By what ridiculous metric is the world not better than a hundred years ago? You stupid reactionary retard. Stop reading Evola and go out in the sun every once in a while.

[Anonymous No.11884977]

>>11884964
this is by far the best executed of these tired pieces of garbage you've strung together, but I still think you're misreading camatte

[Anonymous No.11884988]

>>11884969
Thank you for yer civility. I usually regret post on here because things tend to devolve into needless shit-flinging and references to dated maymays.

>healthcare and prosperity reduce needless suffering
All that I meant to draw attention to is that suffering moves into other arenas. Sure, things like TB & dropsy have become less harmful and frequent, but "mental disease" is much more ubiquitous than it has ever been in human history. It used to be an oddity to be a "melancholic" but now it's not uncommon to be on an SSRI. There's just been a displacement on what is wrong with being a human from physical to emotional & mental (I don't think anyone would say that as society we are emotionally stable considering current events).

I appreciate your observation on "wellbeing" and generally I'd agree, because it's a very basic approach to the idea. I just think that excessive advances in technology and social communication have opened doors for individuals to feel even more marginalized & upset.

[Anonymous No.11884994]

>Trying to influence people's thoughts without being aesthetically self-evident

[Anonymous No.11885001]

>>11884977
How am I misreading Camatte?
I don't think I've ever shared my reading of Camatte.

[Anonymous No.11885004]

>>11884971
>Our culture is "degenerate"?
What? Who do you think your'e talking to? I never said anything about "degenerate," which is such a silly term.

>Stop reading Evola and go out in the sun every once in a while.
I've never read Evola & regrettably I live in the miserable state of Arizona so I have been stuck in the sun for months.

Who do you think you're talking to? It seems like you've assumed a lot about me based on a couple minor posts here... Nearly nothing you've said about me fits me (I do like God & wish more people were open to discussing it, but I'd never force it upon others).

[Anonymous No.11885015]

>>11884969
>makes life somewhat better
>somewhat

LOL

yeah, I guess not starving, dying of infectious diseases, and living your entire life in abject poverty without hope of escape under a tyrannous government that doesn't recognize human rights does make life *somewhat* better!

[Anonymous No.11885023]

>>11884971
It's >>11885004 here.

All I'm trying to suggest is that people lived fulfilling lives before modern medicine and technological advances. We think of the "older times" as miserable & toilsome. Don't you think there were medeval peasants who had a pleasant afternoon hanging out under a tree out in the rural recesses? That there were fun nights drinking & joking about the current royal court? That there were sincere instances of extremely sublime romantic encounters before antibiotics?

I just refuse this narrative that sublime, intelligent experiences only started to happen after the 17th century.

[Anonymous No.11885034]

>>11885015
But what if you didn't know any better? What if you could live to the age of 45 with a wife & some children who sincerely loved you, and yes, you had to work hard every day, but you had something to look forward to. Are you really willing to delegitimize the experiences of millions who were content in their own circumstances because they didn't know "what could've been" if only they'd lived in 2018 (where things are obviously so peaceful & relaxed, right? right???).

[Anonymous No.11885058]

>>11885023
lmao, what a great argument! I guess modern people, made utterly miserable by advancements in technology and medicine, don't get to enjoy those little, fleeting pleasures you mention! Gee, it surely was a mistake to invent anti-biotics and soap, just think about how many fun nights joking about the royal courts have we been missing!

Seriously, if this is the best thing you can come up with, I suggest you go back and re-read Rousseau or whatever the fuck it was that inspired your current views.

[Anonymous No.11885059]

>>11885015
Calm down pal, I'm just saying you can be healthy, wealthy and unhappy at the same time.

[Anonymous No.11885068]

>>11885034
>Are you really willing to delegitimize the experiences of millions who were content in their own circumstances because they didn't know "what could've been" if only they'd lived in 2018
In what sense does making the objective statement that, for example, child mortality was greatly reduced (and that this is a good thing) "delegitimize the experiences of millions" (whatever that means)? This is so stupid. Assuming our current living conditions we'll be considered disastrous in a thousand years, does that make me less happy? No, not really, because as you pointed out, I don't know any better. Does that imply that future advances (once you lay down some criteria) are thus rendered null? No.

[Anonymous No.11885075]

>>11885058
>don't get to enjoy those little, fleeting pleasures you mention
Yes, that is a factor that I'm trying to suggest. Does it bother you that a medieval peasant may have enjoyed a day off more than you possibly ever can (due to your exceeding "comfort")?

>it surely was a mistake to invent anti-biotics and soap
Clearly, I never said nor suggested that idea. You're constructing a straw-man which is easy to deconstruct (common move among pseuds).

Brother, what made you so angry? You seem desperate. By reacting so violently you're simply illustrating the anxiety of our time that I'm trying to point to. I'll be sure to pray for you, brother.

[Anonymous No.11885084]

>>11885023
why are you even arguing, then? no one's denying that some human beings were capable of fulfilling lives in the past.

what IS being argued is that there are more people than ever who are capable of flourishing, and that average (emphasis: AVERAGE) person alive today anywhere in the world is far better off than the average person alive even 50 years ago. this is based on a variety of statistical evidence that based Pinkman has compiled in his new book, Enlightenment Now, which you can purchase wherever books of learning and erudition are sold.

>>11885034
remember that we're talking about statistical averages. sure, there might be some people back then who were more fulfilled than some people right now, but there are indisputably more fulfilled people nowadays.

and don't pretend that material progress (in a wide sense, which includes things like political freedom, increased leisure time, freedom to choose who to partner with, enough money to pursue things you want to pursue) has no effect on happiness (or fulfillment, or whatever you think makes a good life). what if you could live to the age of 85 with a loving family, without having to kill yourself daily at work, or worrying where your next meal will come from or if your home will be secure from invaders?

[Anonymous No.11885085]

>>11885075
>Yes, that is a factor that I'm trying to suggest.
Ah, I see, so you're merely projecting your own misery; now it all makes sense. Because it is absolutetly laughable to think that modern people don't enjoy the kind of things you imagined medieval peasants enjoyed. I most certainly do! It's sad to think that maybe you don't and that's why you have this distorted view of reality.

[Anonymous No.11885098]

>>11885068
You have good thoughts & have made me ponder previous thoughts. I appreciate that. (I'm a firm believer in discussion & dialogue above all else). I see where you're coming from & didn't mean to be so antagonistic about modern society. My original post, >>11884906 , simply took issue with the idea that we could quantifiably discern the value of lives lived now as being superior to the mass of lives lived before modern advances. I simply don't like this measuring & comparing which suggests that life is so goddamn wonderful now because of cameras & medicine, and that people who lived before the telephone lived pathetic & comparably worse lives.

[Anonymous No.11885100]

Ass

[Anonymous No.11885127]

>this comfy bubble will last forever
but wait, aren't these same stemfags generally predicting mass catastrophes within a century?

[Anonymous No.11885132]

>>11885084
>that average (emphasis: AVERAGE) person alive today anywhere in the world is far better off than the average person alive even 50 years ago
Again, according to neo-liberal standards of success (physical health, productivity, contribution to GDP). Who's the judge of "better off" according to you?

>we're talking about statistical averages
Statistical averages? What? You belong on a more STEMmy board if you want to talk about stats. I don't give a single hoot about statistical averages (and neither did any artistic author of note).

>indisputably more fulfilled people nowadays
What defines fulfilled for you? Because most of the people I've met throughout my (relatively brief) life are very much unfulfilled. The bar for modern "fulfillment" is much higher now than it was for most historical persons. This extremely high bar of fulfillment is a reason why I think that a simple peasant (whose expectations were relatively low) may have been more content than a modern.

>worrying where your next meal will come from or if your home will be secure from invaders
But what if those are what drove you to a meaningful life? What if the absence of any strong impetus such as immediate terror has created a sense of apathy that destroys you (as I think is ubiquitous in modern America).

>>11885085
>Ah, I see, so you're merely projecting your own misery
I am a melancholic; I won't deny this. & I do have a distorted view of reality. Thanks for the observations; I'll be sure to ponder upon them.


To the mass of neo-liberal who've seemed to be so apt to act against me: I'm going to get stoned now, so I'll likely be incomprehensible. I did appreciate this conversation & I like that my own views were challenged. I see where you all are coming from and do think I have softened up on my angry position, if that provides any sort of something.

[Anonymous No.11885133]

>>11885127
>aren't these same stemfags generally predicting mass catastrophes within a century?
That's one of the reasons why we need more Enlightenment, kiddo.

[Anonymous No.11885156]

>>11885132
>Who's the judge of "better off" according to you?
Human beings? What kind of dumb question is this? I think human lives are valuable, so I think physical health is extremely valuable because it is the basis of human life. You're free to reject this criterion and argue for another one (I'm curious about what it would be).

[Anonymous No.11885160]

>>11885132
>I'm going to get stoned now, so I'll likely be incomprehensible.
You are not melancholic just melodramatic

[Anonymous No.11885165]

>>11885156
You're curious? I'm stoney & willing to play Socrates (cf. Alcibiades' speech in The Symposium). I could think of reasons why I'd disagree, just give me a mome.

[Anonymous No.11885166]

>>11885160
Charming! Elaborate.

[Anonymous No.11885221]

The sheer force of C*nadian intellectualism will never cease to amaze me.

[Anonymous No.11885246]

>>11885221
this is appallingly bad. now ppl are making an entire career out of "muh postmodernism." all you idiots giving peterson patreon bux.

[Anonymous No.11885335]

>>11885221
Based. NEETzche fanbois on suicide watch!

[Anonymous No.11885348]

>>11885335
That's not very life-affirming muh dude.

[Anonymous No.11885415]

>>11885166
Neoliberals aren’t gonna stone you for your shit opinion, they will just commodify it with no royalties to you