/fitlit/

Look up Yukio Mishima and figure out what book of his you might like.

I'm going to commence a mild /lit/ sticky infographic dump of what I think are Jow Forums related.

Attached: 1500088662056.jpg (1456x3482, 939K)

Attached: 1518290184172.jpg (2048x2048, 692K)

Attached: 1515530312472.jpg (4961x3508, 1.68M)

Attached: 1523810468075.jpg (1215x3031, 663K)

culture of critique

Attached: 1514165770221.jpg (2048x1366, 904K)

This is the intellectual state of modern man

Attached: 1507654816729.jpg (1200x630, 59K)

>no Plato, no Aristotle, no Socrates, no Machiavelli

Attached: 1511924509984.jpg (1400x5316, 865K)

I'm almost finished with Augustine's confessions. One thing I noticed is that he wanted to receive the book of Genesis directly from God so he could write it down then people use his writings and treat them as absolute truths. I think that's an important thing to note. When people find God again, their pride won't let them love God because God is good. Everyone thinks they'll be a saint or their stories will be told forever. And Augustine got what he wanted, I'm reading his book. I also kind of like it because it shows that Augustine is still very flawed even after his conversion. It's the pride he's always had (from what I've gathered)

>hume
>wilde
>steinbeck
what is this, junior year of highschool?
>THAT huxley
oh honey
>schope
>camus
pretty okay
>The Mouse That Roared
user you're not planning on transitioning are you?

I've already gone through most of the basic greek/roman/german philosophy so I have none of the infographics for them saved in my books folder, sorry. This is the last one I think is Jow Forums related.

Attached: 1498781960498.jpg (1612x2072, 598K)

Only reading Quran during Ramadan tho, goal is to complete it before the blessed month ends.

Attached: sultajWojakthewhite.jpg (587x677, 185K)

I'm also glad that he mentioned that he still had impure dreams, because that's something I struggle with. Sorry if my two posts aren't conducive to conversation, I don't talk much. But that's just what I've had on my mind and this thread seemed to be appropriate for it.

How do you deal with the problem of evil?

If we accept the premises:
God is good
God is all powerful
God is all knowing
Evil exists

If evil exists, then either god is not good, god is not all powerful, or god is not all knowing.

This should clear things up, I think:
youtu.be/2WhgUNBszps

Roast me then.

Attached: why did i rate dracula.png (785x957, 169K)

nigga give me the cliff notes, not a video lecture.

fundamental problem with moralistic gods

god allows evil to exist so that we can see the meaning and necessity of goodness. if evil had not existed to its true depth for us to see, we would have no metric for the goodness of those like Mother Theresa.

you cannot have light without darkness, up without down.

You're preaching to the choir, but if we accept this we have to accept god is not all good.

Evil exists because we have free will. The angels were given choice too. I've heard people say that evil is just the absence of good, Augustine delves deeper into this question and logically expresses this differently. But for me, the former explanation was sufficient. Ignore the other YingYang poster. Before the earth and heaven (and time itself) were made, there was only God who is truth. The only reason God made anything was for Jesus Christ, himself. there's a couple thousand years of documentation about this, I'm not good at explain much. I'm just a blue-collar layman.

I ask specifically to see Augustine's logical interpretation of it. (iirc he's a major proponent of calvinism/asceticism.)

with a moralistic god there is a heaven to ascend to and earth is more or less a proving grounds

if we suffer at the hands of evil to the extent of death and we were still good, we ascend

god was not good to us, but we were good and so he repays with heaven, in this way the ends justify the means and he is still good.

t. raised catholic but now ascribe to the Tao Te Ching because of the situation you bring up and others

I don't know shit about lit, but I just wanted to drop in and say I enjoyed norse mythology.

its Yin and Yang ya dingus

I've been thinking of reading malazan series, would you recomend?

>god exists
>makes a playground for himself
>we are byproducts
did i read this right?

Factotum is my jam

I study mathematics so yes.
but I dont lift so iguess it doesnt count as /fitlit/

And it was made clear to me that all things are good even if they are corrupted. They could not be corrupted if they were supremely good; but unless they were good they could not be corrupted. If they were supremely good, they would be incorruptible; if they were not good at all, there would be nothing in them to be corrupted. For corruption harms; but unless it could diminish goodness, it could not harm. Either, then, corruption does not harm -- which cannot be -- or, as is certain, all that is corrupted is thereby deprived of good. But if they are deprived of all good, they will cease to be. For if they are at all and cannot be at all corrupted, they will become better, because they will remain incorruptible. Now what can be more monstrous than to maintain that by losing all good they have become better? If, then, they are deprived of all good, they will cease to exist. So long as they are, therefore, they are good. Therefore, whatsoever is, is good. Evil, then, the origin of which I had been seeking, has no substance at all; for if it were a substance, it would be good. For either it would be an incorruptible substance and so a supreme good, or a corruptible substance, which could not be corrupted unless it were good. I understood, therefore, and it was made clear to me that thou madest all things good, nor is there any substance at all not made by thee. And because all that thou madest is not equal, each by itself is good, and the sum of all of them is very good, for our God made all things very good.
(1/2)

To thee there is no such thing as evil, and even in thy whole creation taken as a whole, there is not; because there is nothing from beyond it that can burst in and destroy the order which thou hast appointed for it. But in the parts of creation, some things, because they do not harmonize with others, are considered evil. Yet those same things harmonize with others and are good, and in themselves are good. And all these things which do not harmonize with each other still harmonize with the inferior part of creation which we call the earth, having its own cloudy and windy sky of like nature with itself. Far be it from me, then, to say, "These things should not be." For if I could see nothing but these, I should indeed desire something better -- but still I ought to praise thee, if only for these created things. For that thou art to be praised is shown from the fact that "earth, dragons, and all deeps; fire, and hail, snow and vapors, stormy winds fulfilling thy word; mountains, and all hills, fruitful trees, and all cedars; beasts and all cattle; creeping things, and flying fowl; things of the earth, and all people; princes, and all judges of the earth; both young men and maidens, old men and children,"[208] praise thy name! But seeing also that in heaven all thy angels praise thee, O God, praise thee in the heights, "and all thy hosts, sun and moon, all stars and light, the heavens of heavens, and the waters that are above the heavens,"[209] praise thy name -- seeing this, I say, I no longer desire a better world, because my thought ranged over all, and with a sounder judgment I reflected that the things above were better than those below, yet that all creation together was better than the higher things alone.
(2/2)
There doesn't need to be evil, God, before time, is good and there was no "evil".

Reading "the sun also rises" by Chad Hemingway
>who knew chad was such a boring writer?

Attached: died of laughter.jpg (171x255, 12K)

>Listening to economic and psychology podcast while lifting.

training mind and body, soon ill be unstoppable.

If you haven't read at least 5 books by Cormac McCarthy then I wouldn't bother reading anything else, fiction or non-fiction.

Start with the Road. Then either No Country for Old Men -or- All The Pretty Horses.

After that, you're ready to read Suttree, Outer Dark, and Child of God.

After that you should read the Border Trilogy, (or finish it, if you chose to read All the Pretty Horses).

Finally, you'll be eligible to read Blood Meridian, the greatest novel written in the last 50 years hands down.

Do it. Read the work of the greatest American author in our history. Read through the work of the greatest currently living author.

Attached: IMG_5381.jpg (2327x2980, 993K)

If I were to summarize: the essence of goodness is what is existence, for you can always corrupt further (destroy) which is nonexistence.

That sound right? I haven't really read much existentialism to expound on essences.

Based

I liked it as well. Definitely a good read in addition to Edda if you're into all that Norse shit.

I don't know man. I really dig it, but I may be biased. Some people claim its shit and I still haven't managed to convince my mate to give it a shot.
It kind of drops you into a fleshed out world already without much hand-holding and you're forced to figure lots of shit out on your own. More so at first, but I wouldn't call it bad writing in this case. The author even admits Gardens of the Moon is a bit of a mess and can be skipped, but I don't know, I was hooked straight away.
It has a lot of inspiring characters and while some do die, there are hardly any deaths just for shock value.
Its been compared to The Black Company, but I haven't read that myself. Maybe think Hyperion set in a fantasy setting minus Endymion's bullshit if that tells you anything.
Bit of a commitment though.

Bukowski was a madman. I still haven't decided what I'll pick up after Women and Factotum.

what website is this that tracks books and dates read etc?

Attached: 14126486248.jpg (252x200, 9K)

Shit man, you must know a lot about politics.

can confirm The Way of Men was terrible

Yes, but you aren't

He always struck me as a weak and lost man who clung to writing like such men cling to a woman. I'm pleased he did though.

>harry plothole

I just keep rereading the silmarillion and lotr
most of the way through children of hurin and I'm going to read unfinished tales next

goodreads.com

Attached: Screen Shot 2018-05-18 at 5.55.45 PM.png (1251x1276, 397K)

+1 for Bukowski
I salute you for regular reading, regardless of content.

Attached: dewey gangsta drank guns cash gangster.jpg (599x586, 66K)

How do I get faster at reading? I've been reading for 2 years now and I have to read word by word or I won't comprehend the text. This slow pace means it takes fucking ages to finish a chapter let alone a book.

Here's what I've read this year:
>Rich Dad Poor Dad (Robert T. Kiyosaki)
>Economics in One Lesson (Henry Hazlitt)
>Why Nations Fail (Daron Acemoglu , James A. Robinson)
>Starship Troopers (Robert A. Heinlein)
>The 48 Laws of Power (Robert Greene)

Chew gum to help get rid of the narrator in your head. You don't need him to understand the material.

I use this extension also, but I generally only read e-books because they're free on the internet with enough GoogleFu
chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/reedy/ihbdojmggkmjbhfflnchljfkgdhokffj

Not one person posted pic related. It's like you're not even trying, brainlets.

Attached: IMG_1310.jpg (1708x2560, 233K)

>Jow Forums the book

Jordan peterson is a democrat you silly misled boi

Oh shit so I'm not actually meant to use my internal voice? Even right now I'm using it to write this comment. Been same way all my life.

Won't be an easy habit to break, any helpful material you know to read without 'speaking' it?

always keep your eyes moving across the page, use your finger initially to develop the habit, move it faster than you think you should and you will read faster than you do over time

start each line a few words in and end a few words before the end, your peripherals will pick the rest

chew gum to keep your mind off needing to narrate and think about it, at the end of each page take a slight pause before the next for a very brief think and summarize the page

read it with the intention of getting the info you want rather than following the author's train of thought

make a conscious decision to read with your intention before you crack the book. ie "am i reading this book to get the info i want out of it, or am i reading it to enjoy the author's writing?"

speed reading and enjoying the material to its fullest intention do not mix however as you practice speed reading your relaxed reading pace will speed up over time.

also, most people read slowly because they allow their mind to wander as the material introduces new thoughts. observe this habit as soon as you become aware of it ie "i am thinking rather than reading." and return to your material without any further thought.

>babby trying to make himself seem smart to himself by reading basic bitch tier literature in each of its field.

You look insufferable to those who don't understand any of this literature, and retarded to any of those who understand any single one of those books.

If you want to read faster, an internal voice is unnecessary for comprehension and is just slowing you down.

I don't really think there's material specifically made for this; it just applies to all material.

What are some good books?

What do you recommend, user?

meditation helps to break the habit of internal narration in all facets of life

for reading in particular, trace your finger under the lines a touch faster than you read and keep it at a consistent pace

eventually you'll develop the habit with your eyes and won't need the finger, keep that pace and it will move faster than your internal narration can

books and media on speed reading discuss this concept

imo they're unnecessary, internal narration is just a habit. outpace it and over time it will break.

initially moving faster than your internal narration feels as though you're not comprhending the material, it did for me. i just ran over the page again till it started to become clear that i was understanding the material without internal narration.

To me it was a lot easier than I thought. It's just practice.

>understanding how to control your emotions, the illusion of the self, the history of the creation of logical rules, the biophysics of consciousness, rise of the theory of natural selection, how to lift, and the idea of ending a limitless money printing machine
>is retarded

I'm waiting for your recommendations.

Stuff I've read recently

To explain the world - Steve Weinberg
The laws - Plato
Atlas shrugged - Ayn Rand
Technological Slavery - Ted Kaczynski
Nicomachean Ethics- Aristotle
The analects - Confucius
Millenium- Tom Holland
Brideshead revisited - Evelyn Waugh
Pax Romana- Adrian Goldsworthy
So you've been publicly shamed- Jon ronson

Regarding philosophy you are better off avoiding ancient greece and rome, unless you care about the history of the philosophy you will end up reading, otherwise I would start right off that bat with the rationalists (Descartes, Spinoza, Liebniz), and the empiricists (Locke, Berkeley, and Hume). Along the side you can develop your understanding of their works by reading Hobbes to support Locke, etc. I would just give a few of their early works a single read and then move on to Kant, then Schopenhauer, Bentham, Mill, James, Waldo, and Thereau. From there you should have a good understanding of philosophy, and shouldn't take longer than a year of casual reading or listening to podcasts while you workout.

As for the mathematics and science, just forget about the fluffy books and go straight into study; Khan academy, or even part time courses you can do in your own free time.

why would you put someone down whose trying to gain a basic understanding of various bodies of knowledge?

i recommend The Lessons of History by Will & Ariel Durant

two historians with phDs summarize human history and its numerous talking points very objectively, offer their own educated views, and leave you with a lot to think about in less than 100 pages.

Moby Dick captures a lot of the mindset of old Jow Forums. is a meme list made by some Jow Forumsdittors, only Evola should be read from that list.

>Avoid greek philosophy
>Avoid mathematics and science books written by mathematicians and scientists

Dude what the fuck are you even saying?

I'm trying it, but I feel like I don't absorb the information fully, I simply get the overall gist of it.

In other words, I'd know it in my mind but wouldn't be able to explain or remember certain peoples or specifics the autor refers to.

try Stephen Mitchell's interpretation of Lao Tzu's Tao Te Ching

your open minded approach to reading various philosophical texts leads me to believe you'll appreciate it

One can only lose mind gains by partaking in one of the dullest franchises in the history of movie franchises. Seriously each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.
Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody, just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.
>a-at least the books were good though
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."
I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.

Attached: 1473063744424.jpg (1623x2886, 1.27M)

it'll feel that way at the start, with practice it gets better

Lol. I only read them for the pseud cred. I thought they were all intellectually trivial shit.

>the illusion of the self
assuming the illusion and the self are identical? Who's to say either exist, you have a false premise and your literature of choice is confirming your bias. I think you should read some neitzche
>the history of the creation of logical rules,
Why not just learn the logical rules? Why waste your time?
>the biophysics of consciousness,
The biophysics of consciousness... that's not what the book is about. The biophysics of consciousness would consider the rates of reactions and the thermodynamic systems in neural cells, a fair bit beyond you I feel.
>rise of the theory of natural selection,
Why not just study genetics and evolution?

are you a troll or are there really this many muslimbros on Jow Forums? the ramadan threads seem curiously filled with actual muslims compared to the Jow Forumstards. if you aren't trolling, whats a good english translation of the Qur'an?

>don't bother trying to grasp an understanding of what you're reading or take an interest in a subject or you're retarded.

Attached: 1523781029804.jpg (645x729, 88K)

>Catch 22 low
>To Kill A Mockingbird shit

Catch 22 is a great deserves mid at minimum

Mockingbird is indeed more childish, but an excellent young adult read for the morals and themes it conveys

>a fair bit beyond you I feel
Oh boy, we have an iamverysmart person over here.

I majored in Chemical Engineering fuckboy. Explain to me how the reaction rates have anything to do with the total energy content of an isolated system.

I'm saying you should avoid the fluffy and dumbed down literature, and actually learn the material rather than the history of it.

Read Greek philosophy if you want but you will just be striking your ego because its material we have been taught in widely available media and early school from when we were born. Start from the empiricists and rationalists and work either back or forward from there.

Teminder that reading without a system is like being the guy who goes to the gym whenever he feels like it and does whatever he feels like doing, doesn't count macros, and never progresses.

Plan your studies, give yourself a schedule, have a routine. Create a system for note-taking that works for you and makes it easy to access your notes when you have a break at work, when you're waiting in a line, etc.

You can be more casual with fiction, but don't be the sort of dude who takes forever to read a history/politics book, forgets all details in a month and can only articulate a few generalities about it later. That's not how you become educated.

Attached: screenshot10315.jpg (313x231, 18K)

then seriously read Tao Te Ching

its a bit cryptic from time to time but the summary to me is basically "Why do you need all this shit? Materials? Thoughts? Ego? You have a body, live in it."

The brain isn't an isolated system, if you knew anything about chemistry you would know that, you also wouldn't ask such a benign question (there is no change in 'energy' in an isolated system, only the total order of entropy). Alternatively you did "major" in chemical engineering, which sounds like bullshit to me (UK postgrad (natsci msci) med here) as "majoring in medicine" I could be wrong on that though.

>references neural cells
>doesn't mention acupuncturist literature

well boyyo you're lost in the sauce

Why would you be concerned with a dumbed down form of what you are trying to understand? Why learn "the history of mathematics" when you can learn pure mathematics?

BASED

Ah you got me!

Who else here has butcher boy as one of their favorites?

One of the few books I have a physical copy of.

You cannot apply certain thermodynamic principles outside of a closed integral. Life exists as a /decrease/ in entropy.

The 2nd law of thermodynamics isn't even applicable to things outside of two equilibrium states fucktard.

I don't understand why you think that Darwin's treatise for his theory and Schrodinger's autobiographical musings are dumbed down.

The Spark in the Machine

by some bong with a bunch of degrees

you'll like it

>The Lord of the Rings
This thread is unironical proof that Homo floresiensis (hobbit) still exists with your fist-sized brains.