/lit/ - Literature

>He didn't share his secret knowledge to the general public because he feared they'd stone him to death

>>3221439

>waaahhh somebodies fucking with me on my /lit/

>>3221239

Ha! That's rich.

>>3221187

Nope. You see, in my posts I extract a point for my argument, while citing examples. But, if it's true about what you're saying then by that you'd be doing the same thing with your post there. So which is it?

Would you like to be evidence for further exhibit?

Exhibit B:

>>3221055
>>3221062

Notice how they both don't contribute anything meaningful. Notice how much their remarks are contrived of ego boasting.

>>3221020

What the fuck are you babbling about? You're trying too hard to troll. You're not even making a cohesive point anymore.

>>3221019
>philosophy is the love for wisdom

That is a tired old remark repeated in every introductory course about philosophy. It goes without saying:

philo- "loving" + sophia "knowledge, wisdom,"

I think you've been repeating back what you've read, or heard, for so long, you're now incapable of creating a thought on your own.

Polly want a cracker?

I present exibit A:

>>3221018

And nothing was proven you dolt, just the regular mud slinging we all see here everyday.

>>3220936

Look who's talking? Aspy to the max

>>3217138
>>3217138
>You either get it or you don't.

Only on 4chan is Philosophy tossed about with the slogan 'either you get it, or you don't.' This is a place of egos over content. This is a place to make the other look like a fool. Always remember: here on 4chan you'll be dealing with fools looking to prove something.

So, that's how 4chan maligns what Philosophy is. But what is Philosophy? It is actually just managing curiosity. Most of Philosophy is about wrestling with a conundrum, trying to figure out something. The practice is to put all those questions and ideas, you have about something, together like gears in a mechanical clock. If all the gears work well together, then you really got something. And if it proves something worth knowing, somebody might come along take it apart, add or modify somethings, and then put it back together as something new. And the whole process repeats itself, generation after generation. Some clocks are older than others, some are more complex. Philosophy is a continuous engagement. You may even find yourself reassembling the same clock repeatedly for a life time. Philosophy is about managing your curiosities, and to do that well. That's Philosophy.

FYI: Philosophy does not have to render out some conclusion or some objectivity. Philosophy can be about raising more questions. The Ancient Greeks did that under the term: aporia. The Euthyphro Dialogue is a prime example of that.

>>3220976

Disregard that 'The' after aporia. There should be a line break.

My bad.

>>3220890

If all you got to latch on to is a minor spelling error, then you don't have anything really.

>>3217138
>You either get it or you don't.

Only on 4chan is Philosophy tossed about with the slogan 'either you get it, or you don't' This is a place of egos over content. This is a place to make the other look like a fool. Always remember: here on 4chan you'll be dealing with fools looking to prove something.

So, that's how 4chan maligns what Philosophy is. But what is Philosophy? It is actually just managing curiosity. Most of Philosophy is about wrestling with a conundrum, trying to figure out something. The practice is to put all those questions and ideas, you have about something, together like gears in a mechanical clock. If all the gears work well together, then you really got something. And if it proves something worth knowing, somebody might come along take it apart, add or modify somethings, and then put it back together as something new. And the whole process repeats itself, generation after generation. Some clocks are older than others, some are more complex. Philosophy is a continuous engagement, you may even find yourself reassembling the same clock repeatedly for a life time. Philosophy is about managing your curiosities, and to do that well. That is Philosophy.

FYI: Philosophy does not have to render out some conclusion or some objectivity. Philosophy can be about raising more question. The Ancient Greeks did that under the term: aporia. The
Euthyphro Dialogue is a prime example of that

>>3220844

Thanks by the way, you've proved my point.

>>3220129

Apparently you don't get it. It's too much for you to have your heroes 'disgraced.'

>>3220844

Was that suppose to rile me up? Are you sure you're not acting 17

>>3219848

Stop, just stop already. You're not impressing anybody, maybe a few friends. (But they're on the same short-bus as you.) I can see through your blatant lying you're just trying to intimidate by spitting rhetoric. You must be young, that's the only reasonable explanation I can come up with.

If you're only able to parrot back what you read and not be able to make an annotation, you don't know shit about Philosophy. You're just putting up a front. If you can't read analytically and derive a critical understanding, you don't know shit about Philosophy. Your just lying to your self.

I know a sham when I see one.

Basically, it's about the self, and how we make the self.

The word Dasein literally means 'being there'.

Heidegger's big argument from Being and Time was that the self is sort of a hermeneutic deconstruction of itself, using the concept of time as a point of reference. Basically he is saying we make ourselves by narrating this story about ourselves in the given moment, or the perceived moment. It is by this continuous engagement of just being there we narrate this sense of the self, and with the concept of past, present, and future we build a history of the self.

But the trouble, Heidegger points out, is that any truth we find would slip out of our hands, because the condition of the self being hermeneutic required continuous interpretation. He is saying because the narrative we give are self that makes who we are, is constantly being interpreted, when we change that interpretation we change the truths we've collected. We repeatably revolutionize our world really. Have you ever look back at something in your past in a different light? That phenomenon is what Heidegger is talking about.

Through out the book he repeats this argument by presenting how the self relates at being somewhere or with something, be it a situation, (i.e. the anxiety before death) or a moment of time (Past, Present, Future).

>>3219165

Cézanne: Words and Deeds
http://www.jstor.org/stable/779207

>>3219618

How to Win Friends and Influence People by Dale Carnegie

>>3219486

intimidated by the better are we?

>>3219532
>He never argued for any form of truth

No, this is wrong. He did argue for forms of truths. For example in The Genealogy of Morals there were arguments at the hidden historic truths of morals and values. He did a shitty job at it, and had some shitty evidence to support his claims. But he sure did have some pretty prose, and occasionally some insightful things to say. But again, his thesis was shit.

You see, with posts like yours it lets me know there are still people out there who like Nietzsche because he sounds compelling and mysterious. He fills a void perhaps. You're hypnotized by it. I can relate, language can do that sometimes. But do you realize how far you'll go with that? Do you even realize to what extent at stretching reason you'll go, just to keep your own euphoria with Nietzsche?

>>3219274

I can relate. I'm not much for fiction, except for maybe a few classics here and there, much of fiction today I find surfeiting.

If you can torrent, I recommend heading over to The Pirate Bay and search for University Press under the E-book section. You'll find some nice things, probably.

Right now I'm reading:

Critical Pragmatics, An Inquiry into Reference and Communication by Kepa Korta & John Perry

The Origins of Grammar, An Anthropological Perspective by Martin Edwarde

Both are approachable books in linguistic. You don't need any technical background to get what's being discussed. So far, I've found them surprisingly intriguing. I feel they give more things for my noggin to play with then fiction does.

>>3219210

What are you expecting to get out of either one?

If you can answer that, you can probably get a better response, and maybe some better insight for when you do decide to read.