>see people on the internet talking about books that they enjoy
>tfw I don't enjoy books because I'm forcing myself through boring as fuck canon novels
>tfw they're garbage but someone might call me a pleb if I haven't read them
>tfw Victorian novels are really stodgy pieces of shit but people keep wanking over them
>tfw Plato was stupid
>tfw Dickens is like reading one of Grandpa Simpson's interminable stories
>Dostoevsky is just "DUDE GROW UP AND ACCEPT JESUS LMAO"
>tfw clearly see how the Munchhausen Trilemma allows me to disregard anything but I still force myself to read boring as fuck philosophical works
>tfw all the 50s to 90s post modern books are unfunny, long winded, lolsorandumb pieces of shit
>tfw Pynchon simply could not put together a coherent work ("Tee-hee, what is coherent? What is not? Look I'm so smart, my Wikipedia info dump chapters prove it! Now watch my mountain of nuthugging pseud fans defend me by appealing to the establishments that post modernism calls in to question!")
>DFW's this is water speech, even after years of Amherst grown (genuinely intelligent in an analytical way) intellectualism, folds immediately back in to the sea of trivial platitudes, indistinguishable from the most banal Mid West fly over state soccer mom self help, and DFW knew it all too well
I hate reading
I don't really see the point of philosophy.
Seems like it exists because science can't measure everything yet.
read fantasy lmao
fuck the canon
But still read the Bible and the greeks. There's literally nothing to lose and everything to gain.
you're immature and anti-intellectual I'm afraid
some people are just unfit for high art by birth
Read Hunter S. Thompson.
You're cuckholding yourself for a bunch of losers on Veeky Forums. Just read what you like
If you don't enjoy it don't do it. No one is sitting over your shoulder judging your taste. If you are enjoying what you are reading you will get more out of it.
Get a different hobby.
Film is pretty cool.
Just read fun low brow stuff. I'm reading the honor Herrington stuff right now and it's easy reading with fun space battles anti dolist and liberal propaganda while unashamedly based around a Mary Sue.
Do you a favor and read you some Confederacy of Dunces. Fun, still intellectual satire.
I've read that. It's no funnier than an average Veeky Forums topic. The black guy segments were so long winded, like some badly drawn out joke akin to the end of huckleberry fin, only unintentionally badly done.
My Twisted World is the real top tier "literally Veeky Forums"core.
I was like you but them i discovery the iliad of Homer and the memephosis of Kafka. Change 5ever.
Don't give up.
>this whole thread.
Thanks for the keks guys.
>DFW knew it all too well
thatsthejoke
Hint:
Did you know a lot of movies are inspired in books and/or they are a cinematographic adaptation of a book?
The book IS ALWAYS better than the movie, trust in me. If you liked "the silence of the lambs" or "It", then read the book.
Also:
>>Dostoevsky is just "DUDE GROW UP AND ACCEPT JESUS LMAO"
I hate the fucking end of "The Eternal Husband".
They are basically the same thing, only philosophy is better at providing questions and science in answering them.
i'm judging
>science having answered in any way relevant question in regards to human existance
>science having answered in any way relevant question in regards to human existance
It got us to the fucking MOON loser, what have YOU done in regards to human existence??
Is science a person?
>us
I didn't go to the moon. when did you guys go to the moon?
>They are basically the same thing
Not really. Science needs to meet a much stricter set of criteria. Something can be pseudoscience without there really being a doubt about it.
Philosophy, on the other hand, is rather free. Pseudophilosophy is a much more problematic - and rare - term, largely something used to describe philosophy that you don't agree with.
Science always needs some philosophy - at least in the historical background - and surely enough there are places where the two overlap and places where they can and should assist each other. And it is nice to have ethics for scientists. Philosophy might not technically need science, but I prefer for it to take scientific knowledge into account where it can.
But mostly they're pretty different, concerned with different things. And its good that way, I don't really need a philosopher trying to figure out ecosystems and climates and how they affect each other using dialectics, or a scientist telling me that philosophy sucks because it often isn't falsifiable.
Science always operates in a philosophical framework, not just historically
why are you even here?
this is really, really, really wrong. dont say stuff like this please
Oh, sure. But it can be pretty detached from what we'd generally call philosophy, you can do scientific study without needing to truly concern yourself with philosophical study. Science as a practice is "ready" in the sense that it doesn't need its big brother to help it all the time, it can fix itself and so on.
The framework can operate in the background - one doesn't need to contemplate it further, just let it be there and acknowledge it if ever thinking about the history of science.
It's clear you're either a complete idiot that's failed to digest 80% of everyone's work (Plato was a stupid fuck though, don't know why there are Platoists on this board t b h) and 100% of Dostoevsky's work, or you're shitposting, or you're a cunt pseud
either way kys pls
You don't need to tell a person to kill him(her)self just because you dislike his(her) posts...
No it isn't.
Music is pretty cool.
>Silence of the Lambs book is better than the movie
...
>claiming other people are pseuds when you openly admit you do not enjoy reading canonical literature, or your reading in general
>claiming Pynchon is incoherent when even his most opaque work Gravity's Rainbow has a very lineal progression sans logical digressions (but I wouldn't think you'd be able to read him)
>implying Wallace was self-aware of his platitudes and his whiney fist-shaking against pedestrian concerns and "genuinely intelligent in an analytical way"
Jesus, here it is folks: the untermensch explains why a Harry Potter script is outselling any real attempts at adult writing
1. I do think you're stupid and ignorant because of your bad taste.
2. That really shouldn't bother you, just read what you wanna read, I heard there's a new Harry Potter book out, maybe something for you!
nice bait, friend :)))
Just watch tv and grow fat like the Jews intended for retards like you
t. Hollywood-junkie
>Science as a practice is "ready" in the sense that it doesn't need its big brother to help it all the time
And that's its biggest caveat right there.
I agree with almost everything you said, op.
But to call Plato dumb is just fucked up. You gotta remember the times he was living in.