/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.16142369]

When will the nonfictards and philosofrauds finally be contained in their own board?

Can't stand those brainlets. Simple as.

[Anonymous No.16142378]

>>16142369
You really want more space for Harry Potter, Infinite Jest, Lolita spam huh? It's that important to you huh? Enjoy it when you get it.

[Anonymous No.16142391]

>>16142378
>You really want more space for Harry Potter, Infinite Jest, Lolita spam huh?

[Anonymous No.16142411]

>>16142391
It is clear to see which ones are the brainlets.

[Anonymous No.16142419]

>>16142411
People who write posts like these: >>16142378

[Anonymous No.16142439]

>>16142419
Or people who write posts like these
>>16142391
>>16142369

[Anonymous No.16142458]

>>16142378
More discussion of literature would probably lead to more literature-related shitposting, sure, but it would primarily lead to discussion of actual literature. With all you pseudoscientists shitting up this board, there is hardly room for literature discussion apart from the few memes that everybody knows.

>>16142439
Spoken with the wit of a true philosopher.

[Anonymous No.16142506]

Agree, just compare /lit/ top 100 books 2014 vs 2019 and quality of posting
/phil/ containment would massively improve /lit/

[Anonymous No.16142517]

>>16142506
2019 filled with edgy polemical nonfiction for midwits

[Anonymous No.16142553]

>>16142369
Based.
They should follow the rules or just leave.
>>16142378
>t. reddit

[Anonymous No.16142556]

>>16142369
Nobody cares what you want

[Anonymous No.16142571]

>>16142517
>>16142506
Damn, /lit/ has certainly acquired some real taste. Fiction really is just for rubes who cant cope with reality.

[Anonymous No.16142582]

>>16142571
>Spoken with the wit of a true philosopher.

[Anonymous No.16142604]

>>16142582
Maybe you should go play pretend you're in another world so you don't have to deal with the things in the real one you don't like, crybaby bitch.

[Anonymous No.16142643]

>>16142604
most non-fiction has no literary value. The only non-fiction in that chart is there for the memes.

[Anonymous No.16142648]

>>16142643
>hasn‘t read the bible
Anon pls

[Anonymous No.16142649]

>>16142369
Only capable of enjoying fiction huh OP? You are a simpleton
No doubt you need to stop whatever you're doing and concentrate just to fart

[Anonymous No.16142658]

>>16142643
>most non-fiction has no literary value.
Those are some hot opinions you got there.
And you assume that most fiction does?
You do realize fiction encompasses 99.9% of the total fucking garbage oversaturating the market, right? Everybody thinks they're an author, there's an overabundance of outright shitty books that almost entirely dominate the whole lit world almost exclusively through the medium of fiction.

[Anonymous No.16142673]

>>16142649
>No doubt you need to stop whatever you're doing and concentrate just to fart
I feel called out

[Anonymous No.16142682]

>>16142658
yeah dude that joke you found in your chemistry textbook builds up it's aesthetic value

[Anonymous No.16142686]

>>16142658
>cherry picking the worst possible example just to prove your argument
It's like, non fiction readers are brainded retarded

[Anonymous No.16142692]

>>16142378
That's miles better then having threads filled to the brim with psueds fellating each other.

[Anonymous No.16142696]

>>16142673

[Anonymous No.16142697]

Be careful /lit/ I'll call /fit/ over to separate you all

But really it's like cyclists stopping 30 miles into a race to fist fight. You people look retarded

[Anonymous No.16142698]

>>16142686
>>cherry picking the worst possible example
No, your argument entirely relies on cherry picking the best possible example; that's kind of the point - retard. You are ignoring the very obvious fact that the vast majority of fiction novels are just like what I posted.

[Anonymous No.16142706]

This shouldn't even be an argument. It's a literature board, not a philosophy board. Just get the fuck out.

[Anonymous No.16142716]

>>16142697
it's ok using /lit/ for the literary gains but don't pretend to be more than tourist

[Anonymous No.16142719]

>>16142706
>This shouldn't even be an argument.
No, it shouldn't, because this thread doesn't actually have anything to do with discussing literature. You are contributing to posting shitty fucking threads that further decay the quality of this board because dumbfuck illiterates like you can't even read the sticky.
>those discussions of philosophy that take place on /lit/ should be based around specific philosophical works to which posters can refer.
Maybe you idiots have a hard time digesting this because it wasn't written in the world of Harry Potter you pseuds love so much.

[Anonymous No.16142729]

>>16142719
>The jannies said so therefore there should be no objection.
Just go away. You sicken me.

[Anonymous No.16142730]

>The best effortposts on the site are made by philosophy people
>Even with the pseuds ruining the board with philosophy threads, it's the effortposts by other people that make those threads a little better and often take down the pseuds for your amusement
>The fiction nerds still would rather see Lolita Infinite Jest Harry Potter take up more space because they resent the sheer existence of people NOT TALKING ABOUT FICTION
I really do want a /phil/ board. I don't want to share a board with shitty complaining babies that really just want to read Harry Potter in peace so hard they've grown to actively resent nonfiction and philosophy sharing space with them.
>None of the pro-fiction posts in this thread are efforposts they're just chad yes/basedjack redd-tier shit
Yeah I'm thinking you guys deserve your own reddit Harry Potter board to yourselves who the fuck wants to have you around? Keep /lit/ and give us /phil/.

[Anonymous No.16142736]

>>16142729
Tourists like you shouldnt try to become governors. Get out.

[Anonymous No.16142737]

>>16142730
HARYPOTTER
!!AH HAHAH I SAID THE HTEING
I SAID HAIRYT POTTERY A GAIN!! AHAHAHAHAHA
HARRY POTTER HARRY POTTER!!!!!
ARE YOU MAD YET? HARRY POTTER!!!!!!!!

You deserve to get crushed by a building.

[Anonymous No.16142738]

>>16142729
It's not our fault you can't read.

[Anonymous No.16142741]

>>16142730
good
leave soon please

[Anonymous No.16142742]

>>16142737
Go read one of your romance novels and calm down. You're being hysterical.

[Anonymous No.16142751]

blablabla
philosophy isn't truth you stupid micropenis
it's just one guy's headcanon
you're not better than anyone even if you do read it
which you probably don't, like 90% of the faggots posting pictures of guenon et al
you're not even worth tagging

[Anonymous No.16142753]

>>16142741
Need a /phil/ board first.
>>16142737
You guys really can't make effortposts can you? Like literally can't. It's all about this kind of bullshit. Fiction consumer brains are fucking fried if I had to go off the ones in this thread.

[Anonymous No.16142759]

No one would complain about the philosophy threads if only they followed the rules in the sticky.
No one even gives a shit anymore about the fiction-nonfiction debate.
Even the science fiction faggots got used to a corner of the board, where they belong. that's why nobody complains about them.

[Anonymous No.16142760]

>>16142716

What you mean? What better time to stroll through some unusual boards? Oh well, time to see what's going on over at /a/...

[Anonymous No.16142768]

aaaaaa wahhhh effort effort! he's actually employing effort and not just repeating the same shit! aaah how uncool! look at him actually writing something!!!
slit <-your neck

[Anonymous No.16142772]

>>16142768
epic own bro. you sure showed them.

[Anonymous No.16142775]

philfags ITT

[Anonymous No.16142783]

>>16142759

Scifi the jews of /lit/ confirmed

[Anonymous No.16142784]

>>16142506
>>16142517
this is fucking retarded. Philosophy, religion and literature belong together. Are you really pretending to understand Dante, Goethe, Melville, Dosto, Borges, Nietzsche (TSZ) etc. without having read any philosophy? The majority of the 2014 chart would fit into the category of Philosophical fiction.

[Anonymous No.16142789]

>>16142784
You've read none of the authors you mentioned. That's the real issue with you people. At least people posting about HARRY POTTER, as the zit-studded imbecile above likes to say, have actually perused one of those volumes.

[Anonymous No.16142794]

>>16142775
That really does more to describe this thread and the seething Harry Potter fanbase in it. You trannies could just make your own threads instead of caring about people having philosophy threads too.

[Anonymous No.16142796]

>>16142775
>seething thread got made
>seething pro-fiction anons seething
>it's not US who are angry, it's THEM!

[Anonymous No.16142799]

>>16142794
get your own board.

[Anonymous No.16142803]

ITT: Brainlet anons seething at philosophy and nonfiction admit they prefer Harry Potter to either and accuse the other side of seething

[Anonymous No.16142805]

>>16142796
>pro-fiction
its a literature board.
there's no pro- or anti- anything.
you people don't belong here, period.

[Anonymous No.16142810]

>>16142775
Fictionfags itt

[Anonymous No.16142811]

>>16142799
Already got one. You're the one seething that you wish you hard a board dedicated to Harry Potter, since clearly this one aint it.

[Anonymous No.16142816]

>>16142805
You deliberately define literature to exclude non-fiction and philosophy. Not even the rules sticky does, it's entirely you fiction anons who want to claim the board for yourselves and kick out people when you can just choose not to participate in those threads. And then you spam up the site with these complaint threads. Stop gaslighting.

[Anonymous No.16142823]

>>16142794
>>16142796
No one cares what you read or how you read it. I also would not give a fuck about your opinion on Harry Potter or Don Quixote.
Just follow the rules when posting.
For all i know, you could be the only 2 anons who actually know what they are talking about but the others who orbit you just break the rules and shitpost mindlessly and you as a culture within a board make a poor job not keeping them in line, which makes co-existence harder.

[Anonymous No.16142824]

>>16142686
>>cherry picking the worst possible example
Are we going to pretend that books like that are a minority in the fiction world?

[Anonymous No.16142829]

>>16142823
>Just follow the rules when posting.
That's real ironic considering this thread you posted isn't even following the rules.

[Anonymous No.16142832]

>>16142824
To be fair it is very likely that there is and has been just as much worthless garbage philosophy.

[Anonymous No.16142834]

>>16142816
define define define
more philosobabble
go unpack the dominance hierarchy while getting sodomized by your pet dead "thinker," you insufferable maggot. There's nothing more pathetic than a loser who thinks himself superior.

[Anonymous No.16142840]

>>16142829
>you posted
are you retarded?

[Anonymous No.16142843]

>>16142834
>define
>philosobabble
I wasn‘t aware of the full impact of fictionfag retardation until now.

[Anonymous No.16142844]

>>16142823
>Just follow the rules when posting.
For all i know, you could be the only 2 anons who actually know what they are talking about but the others who orbit you just break the rules and shitpost mindlessly and you as a culture within a board make a poor job not keeping them in line, which makes co-existence harder.
I agree with you, I make sure to do what I can to make /lit/ good for me and others, and I wish people did that too because you get what you give. I hate the spammers as much as you but I get a lot out of the good anons who make good posts throughout philosophy and fiction threads alike. I don't know what I or anyone can do to control a bunch of joined-today pseuds and /pol/ people, jannies are supposed to take care of that but the jannies of /lit/ are absolute shit.

[Anonymous No.16142854]

>>16142823
I agree with you, I make sure to do what I can to make /lit/ good for me and others, and I wish people did that too because you get what you give. I hate the spammers as much as you but I get a lot out of the good anons who make good posts throughout philosophy and fiction threads alike. I don't know what I or anyone can do to control a bunch of joined-today pseuds and /pol/ people, jannies are supposed to take care of that but the jannies of /lit/ are absolute shit.

[Anonymous No.16142856]

>>16142832
I never asserted the claim that most non-fiction had literary value. It is obvious in both cases that there will be a small minority of works that will persist to have significant historical and aesthetic value. The contention is that the other anon made the implicit argument that a majority of fiction has literary value, by contrasting it from non-fiction which he claimed didn't.

[Anonymous No.16142863]

Do you fucks even like Harry Potter lol
Thought Harry Potter was more of a twitter user thing.

[Anonymous No.16142865]

>>16142843
It's really incredible how utterly stupid these people are showing themselves to be. It's no wonder they complain, they're literally tantrum-throwing brainlets.

[Anonymous No.16142868]

>>16142840
If you aren't OP then you are sure fuckin stupid for posting in this thread, which is against the rules, and claiming people from other threads are breaking them. Maybe your first post itt should have been informing OP of his mistake.

[Anonymous No.16142872]

>>16142863
At the start I mentioned Harry Potter because there's Harry Potter threads made a lot, I didn't even suggest that was something fiction anons liked, but rather that they would get that spammed up more, to suggest that would be bad for them. Then the fucking idiots started saying they actually would like that more than sharing space with nonfiction and philosophy. They dug their own grave.

[Anonymous No.16142875]

>>16142369
when that happens, this board will be flooded with kids and wine-aunts, and you will regret ever begging for that change.

[Anonymous No.16142879]

>>16142875
They will cry loud and long. I can‘t wait for that day.

[Anonymous No.16142894]

>>16142875
better than self-important fart sniffers who think because they read the first three pages of critique that they're superior

[Anonymous No.16142899]

>>16142879
You don't have to wait. You are free to go, now. Go.

[Anonymous No.16142901]

>>16142789
I've read all of them and you must be retarded to pretend they are not philosophical. Please explain how threads about Dosto, Camus and Kafka are different from threads about Heidegger and Kierkegaard or why you should be able to talk about the Divine Comedy, but not about Aquinas and the Bible. Stop trying to eliminate philosophy from this board, the /pol/tards are the real threat.

[Anonymous No.16142902]

>>16142894
What does it tell us that you have intellectual insecurities about straw men

[Anonymous No.16142904]

>>16142856
I think you implied it.
I said that most non-fiction has no literary value. I didn't meant to say that most fiction -had- literary value.
I guess that what i was trying to say is that in non-fiction the aesthetic qualities of a work are secundary to the goal of communicate information and/or persuade.
>>16142868
he was already informed of that by a previous post

[Anonymous No.16142908]

>>16142901
>namedrop namedrop namedrop yada yada
you're just proving my point
for all these great names you've allegedly read, you're still incapable of producing any ideas, or even any single sentence not completely banal.
You're a blind rat who thinks himself king of the maze.

[Anonymous No.16142909]

>tfw i spent too much time trying to force myself to read fiction until i started reading non-fiction and realized that the issue was that my brain refused to be fed pointless garbage

[Anonymous No.16142910]

>>16142863
>>16142872
surprisingly or not the Harry Potter spam is new and is probably made by users of r/bookscirclejerk having a firsthand 4chan experience

[Anonymous No.16142912]

>>16142904
>I said that most non-fiction has no literary value. I didn't meant to say that most fiction -had- literary value.
It's a fundamentally stupid statement, guy.
If you think non-fiction shouldn't be allowed on /lit/ because "most of it doesn't have literary value."
What does it tell us is your opinion about fiction being allowed here? It says you think most fiction has literary value.
This is clearly false.

[Anonymous No.16142914]

>>16142909
>frogposter

[Anonymous No.16142915]

>>16142899
Give me a board and i‘m out.

[Anonymous No.16142920]

>>16142658
Comparing good non-fiction to shitty erotica for women is like comparing Cervantes and Proust to self help books and d-list celebrity autobiographies
>WMBW books
Based

[Anonymous No.16142921]

>>16142912
Why do i feel like i'm talking to a child here?
did you even read the rest of the post?

[Anonymous No.16142923]

>>16142914
T. Forgets where he is

[Anonymous No.16142925]

>>16142915
>>>/sci/
>>>/x/
>>>/reddit/
Bye.

[Anonymous No.16142938]

>>16142921
>did you even read the rest of the post?
It's just brainless goalpost moving. If you didn't train your intellect exclusively on binging Twilight and Game of Thrones you'd maybe have learned something about dialectic.

You were attempting to justify your bias against non-fiction by placing an unrealistic standard upon it that the fiction works you defend don't live by. If you weren't a 60 IQ mouthbreather you wouldn't have said it at all, because it was intuitively obvious before you ever said it.

[Anonymous No.16142945]

>>16142938
You lack basic human interaction. I can't help you with that.

[Anonymous No.16142953]

>>16142945
You lack basic common sense and decency to admit you said something retarded

[Anonymous No.16142961]

>>16142953
Conversation was smoothier with the other philosophy anon, hopefully he's not ashamed of you.

[Anonymous No.16142962]

Just go away, since you are all so superior, and we're just retarded and mouthbreathing, right?
Just get your own board, then. Nobody fucking wants you here.

[Anonymous No.16142965]

>>16142961
>Conversation was smoothier
I can see why conversation would seem 'smoothie' for you when you don't feel pressured to actually make sense of the shit you say or admit you might have been wrong.

[Anonymous No.16142971]

>>16142965
I'm not arguing with you dude. You are not even on my level.

[Anonymous No.16142977]

>>16142971
>You are not even on my level.
That's true at least, I'd probably have to inject paint thinner straight into my brain to get that far down.

[Anonymous No.16142993]

>>16142977
owned
now bye

[Anonymous No.16143005]

>>16142961
At this point I can't really tell why you two are still going. All I'll say is I'm ok coexisting with fiction people, and I hate the phil pseud spam as much as anyone else, but 1) being anti-philosophy cause of that is stupid, and 2) some of these fiction people who are anti-philosophy are especially stupid, as shown through this thread. I'd like a /phil/ board just so I never have to see threads like this made over and over AND the Harry Potter/Infinite Jest/Lolita/etc spam. I have a feeling the phil pseuds that invade /lit/ actually come here because they're adjacent to that fiction stuff anyway. /phil/ will look different, I once visited the 8ch philosophy board and it's completely different from the pseud bullshit here, it has its own problems but 4chan philosophy effortposters could deal with that easily.

[Anonymous No.16143017]

>>16142993
Bye-bye, and don't come back.

[Anonymous No.16143024]

>>16143005
I hope you get a philosophy board one day, but you must realize that is highly likely that religion will also included there because it's even more demanded than a philosophy board. I guess you'll learn to deal with that at the right time.

[Anonymous No.16143043]

>>16143024
There should be a /rel/ as well as a /phil/ and if they get a board before us, /lit/ might actually get rid of some of the recent larper traditionalist stuff.

[Anonymous No.16143044]

HURR HUR GUENON
PBUHPBUHPBUH
SPOONFEED ME ON KANT
WHAT WOULD STEIMER SAY ABOUT X
<PHOTO OF PHILOSOPHER FROM WIKI>
HAHA I KNOW SO MUCH IM SMART AND TOTALLY NOT A BRAINDEAD MICROPENIS WITH DUNNING KRUGER

[Anonymous No.16143055]

>>16143044
This is just like that time with Lord Voldemort

[Anonymous No.16143063]

I liked the 2 Harry potter movies i saw, i'll admit that.

[Anonymous No.16143067]

>>16142908
I'm namedropping because this is a meta thread and I need examples to make a point. I agree with you on random stoner thought threads that should be banned because they don't focus on books, slow threads on specific authors keep this board alive.
How are you going to enforce the rule of banning philosophy if you can't even define the line between philosophy and literature? Are Plato's dialogues non-fiction or fiction? Are threads about Homer that different from threads about the Gita? Should you be able to talk about literary theory? You need to be able to talk about the rest of Nietzsche's books if you make a thread about TSZ. Where do you draw the line? And the meme that all of /lit/ doesn't read is retarded and shows that you never bothered to read the actual philosophy threads. But no, threads like "bros I just finished Lolita and I'd like to lick Do's feet, books on how to groom a 12 yo?" should be what /lit/ should really be about..

[Anonymous No.16143068]

>>16142784
>Philosophy, religion and literature belong together.
Nonsense. Logically, philosophy belongs with science. Too bad /sci/ is dominated by people with missing chromosomes.

[Anonymous No.16143086]

>>16143068
Philosophy should be on its own, science on its own, religion on its own, fiction (maybe with some non-phil non-fiction) on its own. It's better for everyone that way. But no we need fifty /v/ spinoffs instead.

[Anonymous No.16143087]

>>16143068
>The history of philosophy belongs to >>>/his/
I like this anon

[Anonymous No.16143093]

>>16143044
don't forget the 40 daily marx threads

[Anonymous No.16143098]

>>16143093
I don't know what reality you live in but I never see 40 Marx threads. I do see 40 Hitler, Culture of Critique, and other such nonsense threads though.

[Anonymous No.16143106]

>>16143044
>Guenon
Not philosophy. He's basically /x/ tier.

[Anonymous No.16143109]

>>16143093
at most i've seen 3 Marx threads at the same time

[Anonymous No.16143117]

I have never once seen a decent """philosophy""" thread on /lit/, it's always just thinly veiled threads to discuss politics outside of /pol/.

[Anonymous No.16143118]

>>16143067
>I'm namedropping because this is a meta thread and I need examples to make a point.
No, you're doing it because that's all you retards ever do, to make yourselves feel important.

[Anonymous No.16143122]

>>16143098
they're all made by the same /pol/ tourists.
point is philosophy faggots should be purged from this board

[Anonymous No.16143130]

>>16143117
Do you even click on most of the threads? Most aren't politics. You see what you click, you must be clicking the politics threads. This is an example of the effort people put into philosophy threads now and then.
>>/lit/thread/S16115885

[Anonymous No.16143140]

>>16143130
still not lit. goodbye.

[Anonymous No.16143146]

>>16142369
Non-fiction is just a genre of fiction.

[Anonymous No.16143149]

>>16143140
Ok Potterhead.

[Anonymous No.16143154]

>>16143140
Clearly it is and why Phil threads have always been allowed. Stay mad, brainlet

[Anonymous No.16143157]

>>16143122
All true, but this entire thread is at best an academic exercise since this board is essentially unmoderated. If they won't even remove obvious troll threads, expecting them to distinguish genres of content is a pipe dream.

[Anonymous No.16143159]

>>16143149
AAHAHAHAH I SAID THIE THING AGAIN!! LOOK MOM! LOOK! COME OVER HERE MOM! LOOK AT THE THING I SIAD! HARRY POTTER! AHARRY POTTE! AAHAHHARRY POATTER! AAHAHAHAHHAARRYP OTTERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

[Anonymous No.16143164]

>>16143157
ok guys,
who wants to be the next /lit/ janitor?

[Anonymous No.16143167]

>>16143130
Now post the """philosophy""" threads that reach the bump limits on a daily basis, for every 1 on topic thread you can find I can post 20 off-topic philosophy threads.
>you must be clicking the politics threads.
Same thing, they'll start with citing a philosopher on the OP to avoid getting banned for the off-topic discussion that takes place

[Anonymous No.16143177]

>>16143164
>moderating this shithole for free
I honestly wouldn't bother even if I got paid.

[Anonymous No.16143184]

>>16143167
that's not how people get banned.
Janitors have been deleting comments lately leaving off topic thread up.

[Anonymous No.16143185]

>>16143177
>I won't do it, not even not for free

[Anonymous No.16143192]

>>16142369
A brave first step would be eliminating the Peterson threads. Then build on that.

[Anonymous No.16143200]

>>16143177
what? they are not being paid?
They just work...for free?

[Anonymous No.16143202]

>>16143200
FOR
R
E
E

[Anonymous No.16143215]

>>16143192
that problem is not exclusive to /lit/, even /fit/ and /tv/ have Peterson thread everytime something happens. The problem is that people here actually bump that shit so much that it lasts for 3 days and they are all the same:
How he misreads posmodernism/Nietzsche/jung
his influence on the alt-right
some ironic and unironic praise of him
His daughter
etc

[Anonymous No.16143218]

>>16143118
but I'm not a philoposter myself, I just defend them because I think it's retarded to separate phil and lit if most of the books people talk about on here are philosophical in nature anyway. I just hate people like you who delude themselves into believing that nobody actually reads any of the books they talk about because of some /pol/fag's bait post. The board might be shit, but trying to split /lit/ in half is the wrong way to attempt a solution, how are you going to enforce the rule if the jannies can't even ban the most obvious offtopic thread about politics until it's maxed out?

[Anonymous No.16143222]

>>16143167
>Now post """philosophy""" threads
Here's a pretty good one.
>>/lit/thread/S16095193#p16095209
From the OP, first post, to last, is entirely about discussion about books, their contents, and relevant material related to the subject. You really must be some kind of low-end intelligence to see people happily enjoying discussion in that thread and think it should be banned because you can't understand it.

[Anonymous No.16143225]

>>16143159
Cringe.

[Anonymous No.16143226]

>>16143218
>if most of the books people talk about on here are philosophical in nature anyway.
well they arent, so your gay little theory doesnt apply.
the door is that way, fuck off.

[Anonymous No.16143251]

>>16143226
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_and_literature
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_fiction
outside of the /sffg/ containment thread, there are hardly any discussions about fiction books that aren't mentioned in these.

[Anonymous No.16143260]

>>16143251
cope, still not philosophy

[Anonymous No.16143262]

>>16142369
Why not just make a /dfw/ board? You can post your postmodern trash and ecelebs there.

[Anonymous No.16143267]

>>16143260
You're pretty dumb my dude.
From since the birth of Western philosophy fiction has been used to discuss and teach about subjects. I know you are a subhuman illiterate 15 year old that has never picked up a single Platonic dialogue, but the use of myth, legend, allegory and fable is employed throughout it.

[Anonymous No.16143268]

>>16143267
>my dude
stopped reading there

[Anonymous No.16143275]

>>16143268
Well, given that we have thoroughly established that reading isn't your strong suit it comes as no surprise that making it past 5 words is a challenge for you.

[Anonymous No.16143281]

>Well, given that we have thoroughly established

[Anonymous No.16143286]

>>16143281
Cope and seethe.Go read some Potter and chill out while the adults discuss some philosophy on /lit/

[Anonymous No.16143287]

AAHAHAHAHAH HARRY POTTERY! I SAID IT AGAIN! LOOK! LOOK! AHAHAHAHAPOTTER POTTER! POT POT POOTY PIT POT PAP POOP!!

[Anonymous No.16143294]

>>16143267
>Plato believed the allegory of the cave was fiction
just go

[Anonymous No.16143307]

>>16143294
>brainlet can only think of the most well known allegory of Plato when he thinks of Plato
>thinks allegory of the cave is not, in fact, an allegory

[Anonymous No.16143309]

>>16143267
>plato used allegory therefore philosophy is fiction
Good grief. I thought you philosophags were supposed to excel at argumentation?

[Anonymous No.16143313]

>>16143287
Do you think you're actually winning when you do this shit

[Anonymous No.16143324]

>>16143309
>potterfags think that because fiction is employed in philosophy that all philosophy must be fiction
This is why you are better off sticking to books in the children's/women's section.(fiction novels)

[Anonymous No.16143328]

>>16143313
Do you?

[Anonymous No.16143341]

>>16143309
>potterbro has to utilize straw men in order to argue because the only arguments he can beat are, much like his friends, imaginary

[Anonymous No.16143343]

AAHAHAHAHA HARYR POTER
POTTER Y POOTTERBRO POOT PIP PIP POORAY
POTTER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Anonymous No.16143639]

>>16143343
lol
you are mentally ill

[Anonymous No.16143856]

>>16142682
owned

[Anonymous No.16144071]

>>16143324
>This is why you are better off sticking to books in the children's/women's section.(fiction novels)
LMFAO

[Anonymous No.16144228]

>>16144071
HAHAHAH! HE SAID A THING ABOUT FICTION! EVEN THOUGH HES ON A LITERATURE BOARD! HE DISSES FICTION! HAHA! FUNNY!