Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/lit/ - Literature


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 1.05 MB, 640x777, Midwitcore.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
17022976 No.17022976 [Reply] [Original]

>> No.17023057
File: 126 KB, 1920x1541, fad.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
17023057

>putting classics next to midwittery because you disagree with it
durr...

>> No.17023131
File: 485 KB, 640x777, 1607920823283.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
17023131

I only read the based ones. If any unbased ones are checked I definitely didn't like them I just read them

>> No.17023143

>>17023131
cove with me to midwit level 2
1491, Killing Hope, The Moral Animal, The Denial of Death

>> No.17023394

leave 4chan
leave reddit or any other social media site
stop watching tv and playing video games
read only the most excellent literary works

>> No.17023399

>>17022976
read guenon

>> No.17023410

>>17023131
how is rogan "based" he seems like a gullible idiot to me

>> No.17023464

>>17022976

Did you create this infographic OP? Comparing Brave New World to The School Of Life is actually retarded since the founder pretty much is a complete dopamine seeking promoting retard which Huxley clearly detested in BNW.

>> No.17023508

>>17022976
I mean to be fair even low wits read some of those books. My high school had me read mill, 1984, and brave new world so I can guarantee there are a lot of retards who read that shit.

Most of the others are pop lit or youtube tards which is mostly midwit tier though. Not sure if low or midwits read Mr. Spook or the bell curve even if they reference both a lot.

>> No.17023556
File: 1.52 MB, 500x282, 1599374963833.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
17023556

>>17022976
I made this chart years ago with the sole purpose of derailing the burgeoning peterson threads and shaming them off the board. Unfortunately it only worked for a week or so and didn't stop the peterson menace from taking over for years.
I'm sorry for failing you all.

>> No.17023587

>>17022976
Where's The Bible?

>> No.17023593

>>17023556
How long did it take to make this? What software did you use? Did you get any fulfillment out of it?

It's not everyday you see a chart maker on here.

>> No.17023675
File: 202 KB, 368x368, 1594638203804.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
17023675

>>17023593
For that chart I started a thread to get other anon's contributions of what should be on there, so it took place in small spurts over an evening. I use Photoshop.
I've made more serious charts, and other OC besides, and i guess it's nice to see other anons posting them. Though there are certainly some i regret every time i see them. In regards to fulfillment, I dunno. It feels like a losing battle to improve the quality of the board, no matter how much OC or effort posts you make. We're at the end of an era in regards to cultivating any distinct board culture, everything is too integrated with the big social media websites.

>> No.17023682

guys, which do you think is a better career path to pursue? chart maker, or professional quote maker?

>> No.17023687

>>17022976

honestly, I had to read hundreds of midwit books before my taste and thinking improved. I didn't know how to find the good books so I would just check out whatever was on display at the library or whatever books I'd heard of for years.

also, your chart is pretty good but there's a few I would dispute

>> No.17023695

>>17022976
only through hard work and study, you have to read Kant

>> No.17023709

>>17023695
I tried to read Kant as a 15 year old. the sheer hubris of this act cursed me for the next decade

>> No.17023754

>>17023556
Thats pretty sad

>> No.17023771

Start breaking into lit professors office and read their students papers
read lit review magazines

Read grammar books and journals

>> No.17023778

>>17022976
Whoever made this chart is a midwit

>> No.17023784

>>17023675
>>17023556
why so much economics lit in the chart?

>> No.17023785

>>17022976
>right wing bad
>right wing stupid
ok lib

>> No.17023792

>>17023556
it's not about whether we win but about whether we fight anon :3 I'm proud of you, thank you for your service

>> No.17023798

>>17023785
theres leftie shit there too retard

>> No.17023800

>>17023784
economics is peak midwittery, it was invented by A*glo bugmen like Smith, Ricardo and Mill (who is on this chart too but for Utilitarianism)

>> No.17023851

>>17023556
>>17023675
>weeb indulges in his feelings of intellectual superiority by using photoshop to produce half-baked propaganda under the guise of defending the culture of an irrelevant 4chan board

>> No.17023872

>>17023800
>bro like
>if you think about it
>the economy isn't even real
>im so smart

>> No.17023969 [DELETED] 

>>17023131
>I only read the based ones
In other words 'I only read books I know I'm likely to agree with' classic midwit.

>> No.17023992

>>17023131
>I only read the based ones
In other words 'I only read books I know I'm likely to agree with' Classic midwit behavior.

>> No.17024072

>>17023798
Every entry here has been called a nazi by the media.

>> No.17024077

>>17023992
>implying that this chart is anything but a list of 'popular books I know I'm likely to disagree with'

>> No.17024078

>>17023872
I didn't say that but okay

>> No.17024102

>>17023131
>sapiens

>> No.17024109
File: 975 KB, 1068x1401, Screenshot_20201214-020703.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
17024109

>>17022976
They were important to me at one time.

>> No.17024121

>>17024077
Well there’s something more to it.
Many are books that are entry-level for whatever topic they discuss and that are harped on by those that are completely ignorant.
The remainder are books that oversimplify things grossly, in particular attempting to deal with “the human condition” in one fell swoop, for which they are lauded by midwits who have never read another book

>> No.17024341

>>17023709
>not being Einstein

>> No.17024403

>>17022976
accept your place, join us

>> No.17024419

>>17022976
you forgot Zizek

>> No.17024994

>>17024419
only midwit if you endlessly watch his debate with peterson and laugh at sniff or nose touch compilations. His other works are fine

>> No.17025295
File: 2.07 MB, 1116x1578, ,nicefoto.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
17025295

>>17022976
Although a lot of the books you have listed are very accessible, read and acclaimed by midwits, it does not reserve the books exclusively for midwits. this goes for :
Art of War
Brave New World
The Prince
1984

Also I see Steven Pinker, but why isn't Enlightenment Now, or The Better Angles of Our Nature not in midwit-core? His earlier work, The Blank Slate and the Language Instinct where good though. How to Argue with a Racist by Adam Rutherford, and Superior by Angela Saini are Also Midwit-core.

>> No.17025304

>>17024994
sniff compilations are high IQ

>> No.17025305
File: 707 KB, 750x736, based religeon.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
17025305

>>17023587
Nowhere, because its not Midwit core :)

>> No.17025312

>>17024994
Cope. I could make the same argument for Chumsky,

>> No.17025325

>>17022976
By reading and thinking. Just reading will make you stay a midwit.

>> No.17025340

>>17022976

The problem with midwittery is that it makes too much sense to a normal person
So basically you just do things that are so ridiculously stupid, unconventional, and abnormal they actually seem smart
That's my one step guide to being smart

>> No.17025347

>>17024994
>laugh at sniff or nose touch compilations.
this is based behaviour anon not midwit

>> No.17025415
File: 46 KB, 1080x810, spongebob boiling in a pot of shit.jpg.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
17025415

>>17022976
>unironically using the term midwit

>> No.17025625

>>17023687
How to find good books ?

>> No.17025629

>>17023057
Mamy of the "classics" are just midwittery or Sophistry outside of the 21st century or ancient Greek eras.

>> No.17025698

>>17023709
I read Kant at 13 and liked him. Didn't finish Critique of Pure Reason until I was 23 though, took me about four tries. But Transcendental Aesthetics was a breeze.

>>17022976
Just like the most significant step towards health is better nutrition, the most significant step towards curing midwittism is getting your book from healthy sources.

In literary terms, Bloom's Western Canon is actually very decent. You don't have to read all of it, and you can branch out anytime to delve deeper into an era or genre and read more obscure authors Bloom doesn't mention.

Once you've read a book it's not a bad idea to google it (or the author's name) and see what books are associated with it. In fact that's what wikipedia is for: giving you titles of books similar or connected to those you've already read.

The Cambridge Encyclopedia can be accessed online and should have a wealth of recommendations on almost any intellectual topic you'd wish to learn about.

For philosophy, try also this podcast (with many references mentioned in each episode and in the commentaries):
https://historyofphilosophy.net/

Building a literary culture is a bit like exploring a tree-shaped labyrinth. From each book spring three or four others, far enough to keep you busy your whole life.

Beware of how you engage withbooks: they are not articles of faith you should unreservedly agree with, nor should they be fashion statements. Every book is an attempt by one of your human kindred to describe, understand, enlighten, enliven, elevate the world we inhabit, or to make it more lighter, more joyful or more serious. You should give it the time, credit and respect it deserves while also never forgoing your capacity for thought or criticism. Ideally every book should be alive in your mind and connect with other books and ideas in your memory to create something akin to a perpetually bustling forest, with its large trees, its bushes, its roots, its animal small and big. To achieve that you need to take what you read seriously, engage with it fiercely, and think intently about it at every step. The journey is spurred by curiosity, expands in fun, and in the end stays alight with passion and fascination.

>> No.17025706

>>17023394
absolutely based and soulcrushing truth for every addict on this site

>> No.17025710

>>17022976
Jesus peterson is unrecognizable in that pic

>> No.17025711

>>17023800
>implyting smith is anglo
cringe desu

>> No.17025718

>>17022976
Like half of the images aren't books and some people shown aren't even authors.
This image stinks.

>> No.17025727

>>17023057
this >>17025629
The Western "canon" of classics is just books people liked, and then the next generation venerated them because "well they are already liked, there must be a meaning"

>> No.17025733

>>17022976
It's hard to keep the mystique around the thinker today when we know so much about him. The long-dead are free of this curse as with procrustean revision we can always fit them into our worlview and we rarelly get "news" about these dead men such that we're made to change our minds about them.

Our contemporaneous will always be all too human.

>> No.17025781

Remove Taleb (pbuh), Hoppe and Chomsky from that pic right now you faggot.

>> No.17025826

>>17022976
If you read the Prince, make sure to take a look at the Discourses on Livy, since that explains Macchiavelli’s views on republicanism and the most practical way to implement it. Reading Livy probably also a good idea to understand the events from which he’s drawn his conclusions.
Howard Zinn is best understood by looking both at the New Left and previous works of American History. A People’s History of the United States is meant to be a rebuttal to the prevailing opinions of the profession at the time, just as it’s important for understanding the prevailing opinions of the profession today. With American history, Daniel Boorstin is a good 20th century source for the narrative that Zinn opposed. Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. is also a good read if you want something left-leaning but not full-on Marxist, though The Vital Center and parts of The Imperial Presidency are him writing as more of a political activist than as a historian. Age of Jackson and Age of Roosevelt are probably the most useful for comparing with Zinn.
Margaret Atwood was a student of the historian Perry Miller, so his works on the Puritans are worth checking out. Handmaid’s Tale portrays the Puritan mindset as deeply ingrained in America’s social psyche, though Miller’s work provides a less overwhelmingly negative view of that.
>>17024072
I’ve never heard anyone call Jewish Marxist historian Howard Zinn a Nazi.

>> No.17025843

>>17025698
>Bloom's Western Canon is actually very decent
It's only decent for the countries he included. The fact he didn't include any Dutch writers and had the audacity to label Erasmus as a German is egregious.

>> No.17025903

>>17022976
Ignore stuff that has many youtube views or books on amazon with 100+ reviews, there is a high chance that it's just trash marketing programming.
Learn how to research, seek out interesting art

>> No.17025922

>>17022976
A vast majority of this is contemporary pop-sci and politics. If you're not interested in that don't read more of it. It's that simple.

>> No.17025941

>>17023851
>irrelevant 4chan board
Such redundancy. All 4chan boards are irrelevant.

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action