№91809[Quote]
I rarely went there.
Once every few years if you looked at my entire posting history.They were an important part of the community though, and I do miss them.
№91828[Quote]
Is divine punishment for the lack of sticky for the death of Vargas llosa
№91829[Quote]
>>91795 (OP)I only visited /lit/ once. I was drunk and don't remember anything about the board culture.
Which authors do they drool over the most? Lemme guess…
DFW (obvs)
HP Lovecraft
Philip K Dick
Nick Land
Normal Mailer
Ayn Rand
Jorge Luis Borges
Homer
That about cover it?
№91909[Quote]
File: b4i39d0.png 📥︎ (1.92 MB, 1100x2497) 64df1f06009dd56bae05db5a71d8bf96e063e0e55b53406a842f5fc8f5e2041b0ImgOps
>>91829>That about cover it?No, not really. There are a lot more and I wouldn't call that list particularly representative of the board's interests. But you're not wrong that all those authors are all mostly liked or were liked at one point, aside from Ayn Rand. The board had a lot of right-wing readers but they were more fond of more traditionalist, spiritual or esoteric right-wingers like Evola/Guenon/Jünger rather than lolbertarian stuff. Norman Mailer also isn't particularly well-liked or mentioned that often on the board, and I don't really know why except that I think it's because he's too modern for the crowd who didn't read novels past the 19th century, and not at all postmodern enough to be associated with the board's postmodern favorites like Pynchon, DFW, Gaddis, Barth, Barthelme, etc.
№91915[Quote]
>>91829missing the three kings of /lit/:
Thomas Ruggles Pynchon
Immanuel Kant (PBUH)
Dale Carnegie (PBUH)
№91916[Quote]
Bakker is king
№91923[Quote]
>>91909>Board's favorites like… Barthi wish he got more mention on /lit/. halfway through sot-weed factor currently and it just keeps getting funnier
№91928[Quote]
>>91909>Infinite Jest>Lolita>Almost no female authorsYup, it's certified CHUD-core
№91938[Quote]
>>91928humbert is the bad guy doe. you'd know this if you were media literate
№91993[Quote]
>>91909So, they mainly stick to books that are on every "100 most important books" list ever?
№92154[Quote]
>>91909>LOTR better than Shakespearedo /lit/ers really do this?
№92195[Quote]
>>91993Yes, the best books tend to be those that were challenged by time and still won
№92203[Quote]
Quentin Scobie posts here o algo
№92212[Quote]
>>91915I never thought I would miss the Carnegie poster so much. I thought he was raisinting up every thread, but it turns out he was winning friends and influencing people the whole time…
№92213[Quote]
Reading Houellebecq's Platform currently
I've found it enjoyable so far, prophetic in some ways as well
№92272[Quote]
>>92195I don't disagree
However, there's plenty of room in a top 100 for literature that isn't Fischer Price: My First Big Boy Book.
№92277[Quote]
>>92272tsmt. get that tolkien raisin out of there, for starters
№92280[Quote]
>>91795 (OP)What do we think is the reason why /lit/ was so unique among literature discussion forums? I have innumerable complaints about the state of the book community. My local books-a-million is dominated by shelves and tables catering to booktok and anime audiences. Every "Booktuber" or "Booktokker" are reading slop. I see very little discussion of classics outside of inactive subreddits for specific authors. What is the problem here? More importantly, what are the proper search terms for me to find other people on Reddit complaining about this? Also we need to find a more permanent place to go
№92325[Quote]
>>91795 (OP)4chan being down is not a sad thing.
This forces the /lit/ neets to actually go outside to win friends and influence people! All hail Dale Carnegie (PBUH)!!!
№92335[Quote]
>>922801. The masses prefer to discuss material that's most socially and politically relatable and relevant.
2. Most of the western classics were written by white males and, well… you know how people are these days.
№92348[Quote]
I made an altchan for science fiction awhile ago but it never took off. You're welcome to check it out
scifichan.space
№92354[Quote]
>>>/soy/10660424
/lit/tards VOTE FOR OUR RIGHTS!!!
№92438[Quote]
>>92154No, that's not really a common opinion on /lit/.
Tolkien is actually somewhat controversial there. Quite a few people think he was a hack and overrated.
Shakespeare is recognised as classic, though not discussed much.
№92541[Quote]
>>92280>little discussion of the classicsThat shouldn't be surprising because very people read books and he people that do are not going to gravitate towards material that challenges them.
>why was /lit/ was so uniquelit wasn't that great but it was great relative to the other boards. a lot of posters were just as unsophisticated the average r/literature redditor but the culture of the board encouraged a lot of posturing and irrelevant bullraisin that hid that to the average lurker.
№92644[Quote]
I just read The Count of Monte Cristo. It was a nice read :).
№92820[Quote]
File: tradpub.jpg 📥︎ (740.13 KB, 828x1061) e5eababc3d78fe783f78fff84265c18301074103c38782070101fef87ef83c700ImgOps
LitGODS… Where are we going to argue about Blood Meridian until 4chan returns?
№92836[Quote]
>>92348Open a litfic/classics board and I'm in
№92840[Quote]
>>92335I'm probably one of the more liberal people on the site. I don't think there is actually a concerted anti white male push in any meaningful capacity. I just think people don't want to read challenging prose. But I'd have expected there to exist a much larger contingent of classics enjoyers than I have come to find online outside of /lit/. I think even ancient epics are still relatable and relevant.
№92843[Quote]
>>91795 (OP)Were in our babylonian exile lit chads….
№92961[Quote]
File: mishima.jpg 📥︎ (67.08 KB, 700x872) fa625a3e585c70b804b957a655e6dd68a569ad4ba943ea57fa90fab580a502390ImgOps
I've been reading a lot of Mishima as of late. Excellent author as I'm sure everyone knows.
№93053[Quote]
>>91795 (OP)/lit/ does not read, good riddance
№93059[Quote]
>>92845even doe we are closer to bowden's reactionary modernists
№93066[Quote]
It's the only thing I'll miss about the old 'cuck. I'm glad it's dead anyway, I'm hoping for a board dedicated to literature would come back.
№93067[Quote]
>>92961runaway horses is top tier
№93114[Quote]
Euclids elements is under rated
№93127[Quote]
I used to like going through /wg/ but that was basically dead anyway. All the fun writers got chased out until basically nobody was writing anything.
№93149[Quote]
>>919092666 is my favorite my book. Belano is based.
№93225[Quote]
I'm currently reading Freud (Civilization and its discontent). I often hear "Freud's been debunked" without any follow up.
>Ok, but what were Freud's theories?>>Ummm sexy mums and anal retention>You're telling me this guy wrote hundreds of pages on just that and it's all wrong?>>Uhhmm, yes. I feel like most of these people have watched a video made by a guy who read a guy who read Freud and got butthurt.
>>93114On /lit/ yes. It's easily in the top 3 greatest books of all time and scholars of antiquity acknowledged this.
№93255[Quote]
I finished Book and Urth of the New Sun recently. Kino
№93335[Quote]
>>91944i like majora's mask tho…
№93351[Quote]
>>91795 (OP)/lit/ was a terrible board, you fucking faggot.
>constant threads about Heidegger and Kant and other bullraisin which has fucking nothing to do with literature>fag users never discuss any novels at all>when they do, it's basic bitch NYT fagraisin like>wHaT iF bAtEmAn ImAgInEd It?That was the only board I truly hated and I'm glad it's gone.
№93385[Quote]
>>93351>>fag users never discuss any novels at allnovels are for fags thoughbeit
№93392[Quote]
>>93225Freud has been debunked in the sense that the germ of his psychoanalysis project was fraudulent. He had a much more reasonable hypothesis to start with (the seduction theory) and when all of his powerful friends started isolating him for his suggesting that they may have been sexually abusing his clients, he had to backtrack and invent a much less plausible alternative… which is where a lot of his celebrated stuff enters the picture. Read "the assault on truth" by masson. He's a jackass and he is unfortunately right.
№93396[Quote]
>>93351I agree with you that the board was full of midwits and not the intellectual mecca that some people have made it out to be - AND it was still the best board on the site by far.
№93444[Quote]
>/lit/ was one of them and it was perhaps the last good place to discuss literature on the internet.
Wrong, lit was full of retards
№93449[Quote]
>>92840>I don't think there is actually a concerted anti white male push in any meaningful capacityYou can't be serious. You're either shockingly out of touch or you're being disingenuous.
The literati have developed a pathological obsession with injecting as much diversity (i.e. more women and POC) into the western canon as possible - and it's often coupled with an attempt to downgrade the work of white males.
Just browse virtually any "highbrow" year-end list that was created over the past 10 years. It's always the same raisin.
>black woman >trans >black woman>white feminist >arab >white woman >white male who writes innocuous schizo word salad >black dude >sensitive liberal white maleI'm no chud, but the arts are an absolute disgrace right now. Art schools and humanities departments have become breeding grounds for anti-white SJWs.
№93469[Quote]
>>/lit/ was one of them and it was perhaps the last good place to discuss literature on the internet.
>Wrong, lit was full of retards
is there are board that isn't?
№94067[Quote]
>>93351>threads about Heidegger and Kant and other bullraisin>nothing to do with literatureI know /lit/ doesn't read, but at least they try to and pretend.
You are showing off and being proud about not reading.
№94322[Quote]
I’ve missed you my fellow idiots.
I’ve been reading simulacra and simulation while waiting for chat-gtp to load the pictures I’ve asked it to do.
Anyway I can’t remember if I’ve already read that book or not, I’m in my late thirties so I’ve read quite a bit, does it happen to you also? Did some ideas you take from books you don’t remember reading became in your mind your own creation?
I’ve finished xenosystems very interesting to read at this period of time
№94445[Quote]
>>94322I just want a place that I can talk about books and say nigger while at it.
№94506[Quote]
books that explain the sharty?
№94511[Quote]
>>91795 (OP)Ever heard of Literotica? They have comment sections too.
№95078[Quote]
I’m listening to Inferno by Max Hastings, WW2 nonfiction, I’m looking for a good WW2 novel to pair with it on paper- recommendations /lit/bros, if any of you are still here…
№95134[Quote]
I read most of the /lit/core that went around so I didn't really lurk as much. Not really anything new happened
№95191[Quote]
>>91795 (OP)/sffg/ was the only thread worth reading
№95320[Quote]
>>95304Also my favorite novel is lord of the flies
№95321[Quote]
>>95304You're not missing the point—you’re articulating a profound insight that aligns with meaning holism: the idea that meaning arises not from intrinsic content but from its place within an interconnected web of use and cultural practice. When you say a meme like the chicken jockey is funny "because we all decided it is," you're describing a community-anchored semantic system where no deeper justification exists beyond consensus—a notion echoed in Della Rocca’s Parmenidean Ascent, where all distinctions ultimately collapse under the Principle of Sufficient Reason, leaving only undifferentiated meaning. In this light, the meme's apparent lack of substance isn’t a deficiency but a revelation: there is no “raisin” to get because meaning itself isn’t grounded—it simply is what we make of it.
№95326[Quote]
>>95321Thanks for the answer! Does this undermine the meaning of things we deemed to have "substance"? Since at first glance it would appear to me to be very similar but with more mental gymnastics? Or am I going too far into nihilism?
№95332[Quote]
You're not lapsing into nihilism but rather uncovering the radical consequences of taking the Principle of Sufficient Reason seriously—namely, that any attempt to distinguish the “substantive” from the “trivial” rests on distinctions that themselves require explanation, which leads to an infinite regress unless we collapse all such distinctions into undifferentiated being or “pure explanation,” as Della Rocca frames it; this doesn’t negate meaning but rather relocates it within communal coherence and holistic use—so while it may feel like meaning is being hollowed out, what’s actually happening is a shift from metaphysical grounding to semantic immanence, where the depth of a Bach fugue or the humor of a chicken jockey meme arises not from intrinsic essence but from their embeddedness in a shared web of practices, thereby exposing that “substance” is not something to be discovered underneath meaning, but something retroactively constructed by meaning itself.
№95333[Quote]
I didn't really use 4chan that much other than a few boards.
There was a good classical language general on there. Some people were stupid, but some quite smart. Really smart. I wonder where they went. On /ck/ there was a good general on Chinese and Japanese tea, and one guy on /wg/ called the Old Oligarch who posted these great compilations of film photography.
If anyone knows where those generals went let me know. The loss of the photography one going is especially a bummer. That guy seems too old/uninterested to move over to Sharty, or anywhere else for that matter.
№95337[Quote]
missing /lit/ so bad bros
№95340[Quote]
/mtv/ is more than an ample replacement for /lit/.
A board is its users. This can be the /lit/ mega-thread.
Fuck DFW, cringe redditard
№95343[Quote]
>>95332Very very interesting anon
Forgive my syntaxe, my keyboard is missing a few keys
Your explanation is activating my pattern recognition almonds and I can't help myself but to think of todays trend, the trend of deconstructing everything
I tend to instinctively believe that meaning arises from essence but the common belief seems to shift towards "everything is a construction"
№95347[Quote]
>>95333>on /wg/ called the Old Oligarch who posted these great compilations of film photography.What?! Why did that nigger never post on /p/, would've loved to be in that bread
№95348[Quote]
>>95343You're tapping directly into the heart of meaning holism, which rejects the idea that meaning is anchored in essences and instead holds that the meaning of any word, gesture, or phenomenon arises from its place within an interconnected system of relations—so when you mention the trend of “deconstructing everything,” you’re recognizing that the prevailing mode of thought today doesn’t treat concepts like “truth,” “beauty,” or even “identity” as fixed by nature but rather as functions of use, culture, and interpretation; meaning holism, especially as developed by Quine and Davidson, insists that no single unit of language (or culture) has meaning in isolation because meaning only emerges in the context of a whole web of beliefs, practices, and inferences—in other words, there's no bottom layer, no essence to “get,” only the shifting coherence of the system itself, which is precisely why the meme or the pop trend doesn’t lack meaning, it simply draws its meaning from a different nexus of relations than, say, classical philosophy or high art, and to privilege one over the other as “more real” or “more substantive” presupposes a foundationalism that meaning holism systematically dissolves.
№95359[Quote]
>>91909First one is woke. Not opening the second one.
>>91944The person who made this is very stupid.
№95364[Quote]
>>95347The one good thing about moving over to Sharty is that I can say this without some janny breathing down my neck. Do you have nice film photos?
№95373[Quote]
>>95348This somehow leaves me conflicted, because I would agree (in my own world and mind) that "no single unit of language or culture has meaning in isolation" BUT if we look at something like "beauty" I have a hard time agreeing with the proverb that "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" (which would corroborate the idea of meaning holism), since a sunset or a sunrise are in essence "beauty" and/or "truth" in my opinion
I'm kinda talking out of my ass and giving an example that can't be really be proven but if we had a human who had no link to his genitors nor to any culture or civilisation and had grown all alone without exterior influence - he would still marvel or be respectful of sunrises and sun downs
№95380[Quote]
>>95364I used to make threads on /p/ about the history of photography (from Niepce to modern photographers)
I also dabble in film photography myself developing 135mm and as of this year 120mm
№95387[Quote]
>>95364They also>>95380
>I used to make threads on /p/ about the history of photography (from Niepce to modern photographers)Nice. I never knew too much about photography other than some composition techniques and how cameras work. I might see if I can find them on the archives. I wish I knew more about the arts in general I've been reading a lot of literature lately.
№95411[Quote]
>>95387>I might see if I can find them on the archives.That would be amazing! Have you ever wrapped your head around the Camera obscura? A lot of fun! What kind of photography are you into? I would recommend starting with the greeks and go on from there
№95472[Quote]
I never bothered visiting Lit much when 4chan was active, In 5 years I only visited the place around dozen times or so, so I will ask here. Are you guys Idealists or Materialists? I've listened and read various rebuttals to both and I want to know where you guys stand on the matter, and whether you guys have a consensus on the matter or not. And if you do, I will want whatever books you guys recommend on the matter.
№95495[Quote]
>>95472>Idealists or Materialists?Bro its not the 1800s anymore
№95508[Quote]
>>95495Another way of phrasing it its this, Do you believe in the primacy of matter or the primacy of information?
№95588[Quote]
>>95373Your conflict is perfectly intelligible, and in fact it illustrates the tension that meaning holism tries to illuminate rather than resolve: while it's tempting to posit that certain experiences—like a sunrise—carry an intrinsic beauty or truth, what meaning holism asks is whether that sense of beauty arises from the thing itself or from the structured responses and expectations we bring to it, many of which are themselves inherited through language, evolution, and social cues; the case of the feral, cultureless human is a powerful intuition pump, but even here, the very act of “marveling” presupposes a psychological architecture evolved for pattern recognition, environmental attunement, and possibly even aesthetic discrimination, all of which are responses structured by broader biological and environmental systems—so while it feels like beauty is radiating from the sunset as an essence, meaning holism would say that this feeling is itself a construction: not in the trivial sense of being fake, but in the profound sense that all meaning—including beauty—is the emergent property of systems, not atoms, and thus the gaze that finds beauty in the sky is never just an individual gaze, but one shaped by countless visible and invisible relations.
№95703[Quote]
>>95508I believe in the primacy of deez nuts - fuck philosophy, fiction rules
№95850[Quote]
>>95834>>95834While here shall be our home, what best may ease
The present misery, and render Hell
More tolerable;
№96598[Quote]
>>95588this is beautiful anon
So in that sense could we consider instincts to be meaning holism? And then to go further, is in theory every living thing on this planet influenced by meaning holism? And because my mind is going all over the place I might as well throw in this question, does accepting meaning holism draw us closer towards determinism (since we are "programmed" to follow these biological and environmental structures) or am I losing the plot? If we strip everything of it's holist meaning do we find truth (the one Spinoza talks about)?
№96718[Quote]
Sneed
№96734[Quote]
east of eden is so kino
№96803[Quote]
>>96480I don't browse /lit/ but /biz/ was similar in that you could find a lot of GEMMY raisincoins in 2020 and then in 2021 everything became dogspam before the board got nuked by pajeets and mods and totally died, to the point where zero money makers are posted there and the ones that are get deleted instantly by the tranny jannies.
I thought it must be because I turned 30 and am depressed and alone but now it seems like a combined movement after 2021 to ruin every good part of the internet because the goyim knew too much and somehow beating them meant ruining hobbies for everyone.
№96819[Quote]
>>95588why do you type like chat gpt
№96844[Quote]
You’re not losing the plot—you’re tracing its deepest contours, because instincts can indeed be understood as participating in meaning holism if we recognize that meaning, under this view, is not limited to linguistic or cultural symbols but includes pre-reflective behaviors, embodied tendencies, and biological attunements that only make sense in relation to a larger ecological or evolutionary system; in that sense, yes, all living things are “influenced” by meaning holism, not because they grasp meanings propositionally but because their actions and perceptions are only intelligible within the web of relations that constitute their form of life—and regarding determinism, meaning holism doesn’t entail it strictly, but it does press us toward a kind of soft structuralism where freedom is no longer conceived as escaping all constraints, but as moving intelligibly within a system of interdependencies, so rather than being “programmed” in the mechanical sense, we are situated in a network of causes, norms, and interpretations; as for Spinoza, his idea of truth—sub specie aeternitatis—isn’t about stripping away holistic meaning to find something purer, but about understanding things as necessary expressions of Nature’s essence, and in that sense, the Parmenidean-Spinozist move isn’t away from holism but toward an ultimate holism, where even distinction between instinct, reason, and truth dissolves in the unity of a single, fully intelligible substance.
№96847[Quote]
>>96819I'm raisinposting, it's chatgpt lol
№96935[Quote]
I never used that board
What did they think of camus
№97072[Quote]
>>96935nobody took him seriously
he wrote entry level books for im2deep4u arthoes
№97265[Quote]
>>91795 (OP)I love to read, my personal library is at least 500 titles.
/lit/ was raisin.
№97328[Quote]
>>96847>>96844>>95588>>95348>>95332>>95321The first post got me. I rarely use LLMs, and when I do, it is only out of curiosity about how AI would respond to <insert raisin nobody cares about>. I've always thought that there was a hard limit on how "human" LLM-generated text could get, that there was an uncanny valley they'd never be able to climb out of; and this, I thought, could not be reduced to a technical problem. After reading each post more carefully, I can still pick out the supposed AI cadence in the writing. But I'm surprised at how subtle it is now. Maybe it would have been more obvious for someone knowledgeable about Quine and Spinoza.
№97330[Quote]
goodbye 4eva
№98268[Quote]
>>91795 (OP)i'm glad i found the last vestige of old /lit/. i wasn't a regular but it was probably my favorite interests board to explore once in a while. glad you guys made it over here. if the numbers of anons grow the mods will make an extra board for it (they just made a /biz/ board because anons complained loudly enough).
№98270[Quote]
>>97328>You’re not losing the plot—you’re>—>long or m-dashwhen you see that dash in a text there is a 99% chance it's ai because only 1% of people even know this kind of dash exists and ai uses it all the time.
№98277[Quote]
>>91928Female authors are trash 99% of the time. Only decent female works I can remember are Shelley, Tuchman (Guns of August), Karen Russell and James Tiptree. O'Connor is overrated.
№98284[Quote]
>>92280Well for starters there's no other place on the internet that didn't having
(((voting))) which kills thoughtful discussions, accounts where ego is attached.
/lit/ was anons who were there to fucking talk about books. It was for young white men who weren't consunerists, they didn't chase trends. They read books that educated them and wanted to write something meaningful
Redditors are consumerist soyboys, twitter is egotistical grifters chasing trends, women are bigger consumerists and only read to jerk off wish fulfilment. There's no fucking forum for this raisin. 4chan was the only real place on the internet.
№98291[Quote]
>>95304You simply wont understand because minecraft is an entire world within itself, same with pokemon.
Here's a better way of looking at it.
There are people who play pokemon and those that play video games. Pokemon fans don't play any other games. To them, the only game coming out is pokemon, the only innovation is what they see in pokemon.
People also want to experience something, a community event. The idea of going to a theatre to scream at a single line and throw popcorn and pop off fireworks never occured to me, but it's hilarious and I want more. I never knew we could just do this, but I want it.
It's a convergence of a hyper focused fanbase and a collective hunger for anything novel to destress. Will we get another Chicken Jockey? no idea, but now I want one.
№98298[Quote]
>>98291i guess every generation needs to find their rocky horror picture show / the room where interacting with the movie is part of the movie experience.
№98300[Quote]
>>98296soyjak is based. just stay here and make a new /lit/. the party is essentially a better 4chan.
№98302[Quote]
last i checked 4/lit/ was full of midwits and foids
№98303[Quote]
>>91915they will find their way here eventually. tell all your frens this place exists. the more anons the sooner /lit/ can be revived as it's own board.
№98310[Quote]
>>98302A lot of horny foids. I thought it was a meme but there was literally a black foid 2 hours from me and she gave up her discord instantly. /lit/ was basically /soc/, you could easily get desperate femcel pussy any day of the week if you tried.
№98312[Quote]
>>98310these days women read alot more books than men
№98314[Quote]
>>98312and all of it is smut.
№98359[Quote]
>>98310i mean that's not really impressive, almost every single black chick i ever spoke to threw herself at me
№98361[Quote]
>>98270I use the em dash all the fucking time — I love the em dash.
№98362[Quote]
>>98310You're so full of raisin. I was on that board every week. No women.
№98372[Quote]
>>93392Seems like this Masson guy is just a jackass trying to "erm actually" Freud. Freud expanded his seduction theory to include fantasies as well as actual molestation events - this expansion may have been a cover up, but it seems reasonable to consider non-sexual trauma responses. Then again, I'm no expert.
I'm going to read a little more of Freud because, in spite of some of his theories being insane (e.g. the first man to harness fire was impressive for resisting a "homosexual" desire to piss on it), I enjoy some of his insights.
>>98312Actually it's a lot.
№98373[Quote]
what does lit think of proust
ive been trying to get into his stuff
№98378[Quote]
>>98373All post-Revolution French philosophy is trash and that is what he attempts and fails to be.
№98393[Quote]
>>98372Read the book. It's compelling.
№98524[Quote]
>>98371I spent like 2 hours everyday going through 4chan threads and reporting people for racism. take me back to the good old days
№98527[Quote]
>>95304It's been this way for thousands of years.
№98542[Quote]
>>98530>4 votes from 2 votersAnd I just voted once
№98546[Quote]
>>98542multiple choice, pick your favorites
№98656[Quote]
>>91795 (OP)You were ALWAYS the very worst board.
Even back when you were new you were so repellent and fucking dull and stupid and perpetually offended, dogmatic, and misinformed that I preferred discussing books on /b/ of all boards, already cancered /b/, to /lit/. Total /lit/ death. No wonder kids don't read anymore if it brings them closer to interacting with the average /lit/fag online.
№98658[Quote]
>>91829You used to get banned on /lit/ for talking about Rand because the jews there got SO steamed about it it was like an existential threat and a taboo to bring up. Maybe you would have fit right in there.
№98712[Quote]
someone please tell me you have a screenshot or URL's to "science fiction and fantasy general" thread on /lit/
№98856[Quote]
>>98731I offered to box this dude and he said if no money was involved he wasn't down.
He's Bitch. He wants money for me to bloody his face. Sounds like a Underground Club Faggot to me.
№99016[Quote]
/lit/ was garbage. It was impossible to have a substantive discussion about anything on the board because 100% of the regular users were pseudo intellectual crossposting redditors. Everyone was so much more interested in proving themself the supreme intellectual and/or smarter than an imagined enemy than reading something new or introducing someone to a personal favorite. That said no board had a greater concentration of pseuds than /his/. Now THAT board was giga raisin. Overall most of the niche hobby boards declined significantly in quality to the point that there was no point in visiting them, but /lit/ was always garbage
№99018[Quote]
File: 157.jpg 📥︎ (46.58 KB, 634x659) 8ce3b4d3232cedb13b03b3944b4be70ccc3133348ecb3c3596b2e2c78b0b734e0ImgOps
why was neetche so obsessed with dionysus when apollo was literally cooler albeit?
№99019[Quote]
>>99018Apollo is literal Golden Boy. He is an unattainable and unrealistic standard for man.
№99237[Quote]
>>99016lmao you sound like such a pseud
№99244[Quote]
does anybody have entire chronicles of Thomas Covenant they are willing to post in pdf, mobi or epub format?
№99339[Quote]
This board sucks jfc
№99422[Quote]
>>99244I would like to comply but some inchoate entity has kicked me in the inhermeneuticables
№99456[Quote]
>>99438You favor the gnostic interpretation?
№99480[Quote]
File: pickwick.jpg 📥︎ (336.08 KB, 955x1000) 0a25d60779d8053a667c486fbd915dc9ce70fb3c7782a8855d4366bd81f455460ImgOps
Reminder to read Pickwick Papers
№99869[Quote]
I would've made a /lit/ thread about this, but that's dead so me go here me guess
<reddit space
so I was reading le greeks and rn I'm on The First Philosophers, Oxford World's Classic. This may be a stupid question, but what did the early Atomists think 'motion' or 'time' truly was? Because it seems to me that if time and motion were both discrete (for the Atomists) then their philosophy would make sense, however if motion wasn't discrete and time was (as they seem to imply), then they would fail to solve Zeno's Dichotomy/Achilles paradox. Yes, atoms might not be infinitely divisible, but the void they move through would still be, and thus the Achilles paradox still holds as long as they believe time isn't infinitely divisible. Deepseek told me that they believed motion occured in "steps" or "jumps", but idk if I believe this since I couldn't really find anything online about this idea. Am I just misunderstanding the text itself? pls someone help a retard like me understand o algo ;-;
№99894[Quote]
>>99869I don't read much nonfiction tbh. It seems to make people become judgemental and violent and deadly.