/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.14172336]

Reminder that we live in the best possible world.

[Anonymous No.14172343]

>>14172336
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Junko_Furuta

[Anonymous No.14172351]

>>14172343
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Junko_Furuta
>Approximately 100 people knew about Junko Furuta's captivity, but either did nothing about it or themselves participated in the torture and murder. Most of the participants were friends of the teenage boys, who were low-ranking members of the yakuza.

What the fuck is wrong with their society, I mean 2 or 3 sickos is one thing, but dozens of people who did nothing? seriously?

>>14172336
I like Papa Leibniz too, anon. But that theodicy doesn't really solve the logical and empirical problem of evil.

[Anonymous No.14172361]

>>14172336
Sure we do.

[Anonymous No.14172363]

The entirety of the 20th century proves you utterly wrong dumbass.

[Anonymous No.14172364]

>>14172336

Ontology-Theology of Leibniz: top tier.

Theodicy of Leibniz: garbage tier.

[Anonymous No.14172366]

Imagine living a world designed so that life has to consume other life to survive, then have religitards unironically think that god is "Good"

[Anonymous No.14172392]

>>14172336
> [...] - could it then perhaps be the case, despite all 'modern ideas' and the prejudices of democratic taste, that the victory of optimism, the predominance of reasonabless, practical and theoretical utiltarianism, like its contemporary, democracy, that all this is symptomatic of a decline in strength, of approaching old age, of psychologgical exhaustion?

Nietzsche, the birth of tragedy

And he goes on, the whole book about the decline in art, more specifically the battle against Dionysiac elements in art of which tragedy is a prime example, in Socratic Greece. Whilst sometimes going back to his time, to say that it is just the same.

Not that I necessarily agree, Op, I just wanted to share, with you, a perspective in which you are just uttering a stupidity.

[Anonymous No.14172534]

>>14172336
>muh suffering
Have people even pretended to read Leibniz or have they slipped through half a paragraph on Wikipedia?

[Anonymous No.14172576]

>>14172392
Poor old Freddy. If he had lived a little longer he would have found all that awful Romanticism was just a phase and good art was just around the corner.

[Anonymous No.14172590]

>>14172576
>good art was just around the corner

[Anonymous No.14172623]

>>14172590
Nietschefags are mentally ill, don't be hard on them.

[Anonymous No.14172627]

>>14172534
Voltaire was a brainlet and so is every mass-produced college prof who makes his students read Candide.

[Anonymous No.14172629]

>>14172336
It's easy to say this when you lived in a time and place where there was no SOCIETY™

[Anonymous No.14172703]

Using 'only' is better than 'best".
It is the only world and only possible world.

[Anonymous No.14172704]

>>14172627
He really was. Did you know that the fuckskull brainlet hadn't even read the New Testament in its entirety. Read "Edward Higginson's Account of a Conversation with Voltaire."

https://books.google.nl/books?id=iostAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA167&lpg=PA167&dq=voltaire+edward+higginson&source=bl&ots=HWGxzFr8xU&sig=ACfU3U220a4ZrPkqSFpkYm4VS5VxC8QqLw&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=voltaire%20edward%20higginson&f=false

One of the most harmful literary figures to exist, may his name be blotted out forever

[Anonymous No.14172719]

>>14172336
ok boomer

[Anonymous No.14172730]

>>14172576
I suppose you say that later art has sometimes some Dionysiac elements? I beg to differ: most of those elements are, I believe, activistic elements exposing conservative moralism, and are thus, at best, the Appollonian disguised as Dionysian in order to expose a different Appollianism.
This holds certainly if you mean avant-garde art, and I, not educated in art history, fail to see which other kinds of art you could mean when saying good art is around the corner?

[Anonymous No.14172732]

>>14172361
Schopenhauer never disagreed with this, he simply said that this life is also horrible. So the best life possible being horrible therefore states life as eternally horrible.

[Anonymous No.14172736]

>>14172366
This is the same as saying "imagine living in a world where we suffer".

11 year old tier.

[Anonymous No.14172755]

>>14172730
Apollonian is not moralist. Read Birth of Tragedy

[Anonymous No.14172757]

>>14172366
Reminder that the universe would be worse without suffering. Absence of suffering is only the optimal state for angelic creatures.

[Anonymous No.14172759]

>>14172755
It is not moralist, but is related to the Socratic moralism.

[Anonymous No.14172767]

>>14172755
>>14172759
I should add: he goes on throughout the book to complain about various things about the Socratics and how it is very Appollinian, so they are, of course, related. And for me, when I mean moralism, it is of the Socratic kind.

[Anonymous No.14172772]

>>14172366
Hur why bad thing happen , I want fairwee tale life

[Anonymous No.14172789]

>>14172730
The Dionysiac/Appollonian thing is a false dichotomy and a pleb way of looking at art

[Anonymous No.14172798]

>>14172789
Nietzsche was a retard through and through. His work on Greek literature is properly hated by all hellenists past 1900.

[Anonymous No.14172806]

>>14172789
Yeah sure, but we are arguing in the Nietzschean context. Thus, we must use those terms.
And, of course, this doesn't mean that we are saying anything of interest. It is just a possible perspective in which OP gets exposed.

[Anonymous No.14172809]

>>14172798
The birth of tragedy isn't only a work on greek litterature, isn't it? It is his first philosophical book. Not that I am shilling him, but I was just reading it, and thought, let's expose OP.

[Anonymous No.14172817]

>>14172809
It is, but it's embedded with his literature analysis, which is terrible (his philosophy is also terrible but that's another matter).
It's even worde when he tries to rewrite the gospels to make Jesus look like his overman.
His books on Greeks and Hebrews must be regarded the same way you look at his Zarathustra, not expecting anything close to actual mazdeism.

[Anonymous No.14172832]

>leibniz
>right about anything

[Anonymous No.14172848]

>>14172736
>>14172757
>>14172772
Look at all these non arguments, they still cant answer why God would create a world where life has to consume other life to survive
>hurr durr yoU jUsT dOnT uNdErStAnD tHe mInD oF GoD

[Anonymous No.14172847]

>>14172832
Leibniz was right about everything, which is surprising because he wrote about everything.
Logic, semantics, mathematics, psychology, history, theology, epistemology, law, ...
He even drafted plans to genocide Muslims. He really was ahead of his time.

[Anonymous No.14172859]

>>14172757
Apologism of suffering is for people who've only endured mild suffering. It's like the 19th century aristocrat saying that hard work improves the lot of the poor.

[Anonymous No.14172861]

>>14172817
I don't see why he is especially terrible. He writes about some dynamics he thought existed. He won't get everything right, but I think you can learn something from it. Even if it just scepticism towards the socratic logocentrism. And if I am not mistaken, the view that the socratics lived through a period of decline isn't controversial at all. Considering this, he just asks if we live through a similar period of decline. He believed we are. You think not, I don't know.
I believe that most of his work can be reduced to that. He knows of the cultural decline in Greece, sees some parallels and applies it in the know and tries to see a way to escape the perceived decline in the now. This is, of course, not necessarily a good way to view the now, nor does it necessarily contain truth, but it raises interesting questions. I won't accuse you of being reddit, but I believe that actually reading Nietzsche is impossible for reddit without asking some serious questions about their belief system.

[Anonymous No.14172876]

>>14172848
>a world where life has to consume other life to survive

this is bad?

[Anonymous No.14172883]

>>14172876
Apparently to anon. Vegans are a thing after all.

[Anonymous No.14172900]

>>14172859
Aside from that being a complete non-argument, it is also false. I guess you have never bothered reading works of some great monks for instance. To give specific instances outside of orders, someone like Pascal, or more recently a Solzhenintsyn. Leibniz himself was bothered all his life by barely functioning intestines.

[Anonymous No.14172925]

>>14172876

Yes.

[Anonymous No.14172937]

>>14172883
Even vegans have to consume plant life, the system itself is backwards, now go worship Yaldabaoth

[Anonymous No.14173222]

>>14172848
1. Faith

2. There are about a hundred possible explanations for suffering, it's just neither one is necessarily proved over the other and so remains primarily unanswered.

[Anonymous No.14173241]

>>14172336
Leibniz's solution to the problem of evil relies on his aesthetics

He considers that beauty is the greatest unity in the greatest variety. For this to be the most beautiful world, evil must exist in order to contrast with good. Dissonance is necessary for harmony, and the world is to be read as a great poem.

God is not just the architect of the world, but also its artist, and has arranged the world to optimise the pleasure we may take in the contemplation of its design (if we look at it as a work of art, rather than as a calculating machine where instances of good are counted up against instances of evil.)

[Anonymous No.14173292]

>>14172848
and on top of that, the things you destroy to further your existence are the same things that make the world beautiful and worth living in
only a sadist would have made this world

[Anonymous No.14173603]

>>14172343
>On 4 January 1989, the four boys challenged Furuta to a game of Mahjong, which she is said to have won.[5][3]
Heh

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!yvm0QrHZZJQ No.14173715]

>>14172336
Funnily enough, the anthropic principle seems to be directly stemmed from this idea.

[Anonymous No.14174298]

>>14172848

Don't stumble backwards into the backhanded empathy of Catholicism. That something is all-pervasive does not make it implicit or inevitable. It could just as easily be that blights on life like eating or birthing are per Man, not per God. That God politely withholds his providence when Man wants to eat or reproduce in order to respect his free will and dignity, even regarding such abominations. I maintain that extraordinary things would happen if, say, everyone stopped eating for 24 hours.

[Anonymous No.14174323]

Only causal necessity obtains. Possibility is a cognitive illusion in which the mind entertains various reconfigurations of combinatorial elements.
>The world (universe) exists
>As far as we can tell no other universe exists
>Ergo, the world is both the best and worst of all necessary worlds, since it is the only world
>By logical disjunction, this is the best of all possible worlds

[Anonymous No.14174339]

And that's a bad thing

[Anonymous No.14174348]

>>14172364
>Ontology-Theology of Leibniz: top tier.
what is it

[Anonymous No.14174386]

>>14174348

M O N A D S

O

N

A

D

S

[Anonymous No.14174425]

>>14173603
Literally Akagi tear

[Anonymous No.14174437]

>>14172336
>Lisbon earthquake comes in

[Anonymous No.14174445]

>>14172847
>He even drafted plans to genocide Muslims.
Is that true? Based

[Anonymous No.14174452]

>>14172336
>You’re the best of the worst, and that’s not saying much
As far as we know we also live in the worst world possible. Overall there’s no matter to any of it, anyway. There is no everlasting life after death; no heaven nor hell. All forms of existence are vampiric in nature; all things require another; everything wants a complement. Like a crab which has mutated the ability to scuttle along the sea bed floor; our universe mutated the ability to uphold existence. Good and bad is not objective. There is no objective purpose towards life, therefor what you make of it, is.

[Anonymous No.14174537]

>>14172590
Reminder that Shostakovich was the second coming of Bach

[Anonymous No.14174627]

>>14172336
I agree. We really do live in the "beeeeeeeeeest" possible world.

[Anonymous No.14174788]

>>14172351
they have an honor bound society where loyalty and face is more important than the balance of life and death. eg. they are humans, you're some type of ant person who collects debits and spends credits.

[Anonymous No.14174820]

>>14172336
>the best possible world is one where you don't have sex

[Anonymous No.14174849]

>>14174820
It's a world in which nobody has to have sex with you, which sounds pretty ideal