I read the first part of this where he's talking about the consciousness and it was very interesting...

I read the first part of this where he's talking about the consciousness and it was very interesting. I had an conversation with someone the other day and brought in the concept of consciousness and human suffering to politely argue against vegetarianism (long story, not important). I'd really like to have more intimate conversations like this and leave a lasting impression of people, this guy's really into talking to me now.

Is there any way I can just read the interesting philosophical arguements and ideas behind concepts without the waffling? I don't have the patience to read 250 pages even if I get an understanding of 2 or 3 more interesting outlooks. Partly because I average out 10 minutes per page (I say the words at talking pace in my head, I don't know how people read so quickly).

>inb4 someone calls me retard
I'm honestly pretty intelligent except for slow-reading

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=wLHCuzW3-uA
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>Is there any way I can eat shit without getting feces in my mouth?

Eh, Ligotti's a goof. He says that consciousness deepens human suffering, yet he seems to be against all the methods humans have for dulling that very consciousness. There's even that part where he complains about people with the shibboleth "Down with consciousness, up the conspiracy."

If you're a slow-reader, user, I'd reccommend spending your valuable time with something else.

it's not a stupid question. Could just offer me writers who do minimal waffling

Reading at talking-speed is the correct thing to do, yet you must still be retarded because a non-retarded human being doesn't talk so slow that he needs 10 minutes for a single page.

are you a fag or a woman?

To be honest it's probably 5-10 minutes but I know people who read a book in 3 hours so some people can read without verbalising

it's not a skill to read without verbalizing, as the tonal quality and it's contextual interaction between words become lost. Reading without verbalizing degrades books to data, which can be easily consumed without further thought or reflection required. This is also what you are asking for, lacking patience, an important value for people who seek understanding and knowledge due to empathetic thirst for it, and not vanity.

>I had an conversation with someone the other day and brought in the concept of consciousness and human suffering to politely argue against vegetarianism (long story, not important)
In favour of veganism, I hope? Vegetarianism is like being a mass rapist drawing the line at murder.

fair enough I didn't think of it like that. Probably more important for literature though and not as much for philosophical argumentative-style texts but I get it.

If you like short and thought provoking aphorisms are your thing. Check out Cioran.

>, yet he seems to be against all the methods humans have for dulling that very consciousness.
Ligotti is benzo'd out of his mind 24/7 though.

animals and human beings aren't comparable. It's like if I compared banging on a table to beating the shit into my dog.

thanks senpai

Not as much but still relevant. It often takes more than 10 minutes as to read a single page in a philosophical work, because the argumentative structure is to complex as to be extracted by data/info-oriented reading. While familiarity emerges with further experience and thus pace picks up, vocalizing while reading is still the way to go, here it helps insofar as it adds plasticity to the sentences, often freeing them from the realm of inaccessible abstraction, opening up the subjective element of sentences, often quite a poetic one, that, imo, is present in most great philosophical works. There is now way you will be able to speed-read Wittgenstein, Hegel or Platon.

>animals and human beings aren't comparable. It's like if I compared banging on a table to beating the shit into my dog.
There are gorillas with higher IQs than black people desu.

post proof

also only disgusting Thai people eat chimps

Koko the gorilla's IQ has been estimated between 70 and 95.

70 is the average in Sub-Saharan Africa.

definitely. Wish this was expressed to me as a kid because I found it frustrating as Hell when people would read 3 times faster than me. Still, I did better than them in exams so I guess it never mattered.

I still find it really hard to get into books though, which probably is laziness / personality rather than intelligence.

Also only Africans eat chimps generally, there are none in Thailand.

>Koko the gorilla's IQ has been estimated between 70 and 95
in other words he couldn't even take the test kek

anyway I'm not arguing that chimps are normal animals like cows or chickens. Video semi-related youtube.com/watch?v=wLHCuzW3-uA

I've heard of monkeys being prostituted in Bangkok. Might've been baboons or something. Thai people definitely are disgusting though, worse than Africans.

I think you're referring to that in Indonesia they shaved orangutans and used them as sex slaves in brothels.

Disgusting desu, but in Africa they use human sex slaves chained to altars to be perpetually raped by witchdoctors and they eat the hearts of innocent children to become immune to gunfire by magic.

Africa is on a whole different level.

I'm half-way through Conspiracy. Is it worth finishing? I really enjoyed the first 50 pages, but he keeps hammering in the same argument and the new ones he brings up he doesn't delve into deeply or, in my opinion, honestly. The whole point of the book, I thought, was an honest exploration of the worth of living human life. But instead he seems too caught up in this pessimist, optimist dichotomy and he needs to side with this pessimism that mocks any slightly optimistic argument regardless of its backing.

Idk, it seems like he's just been waffling around since page 50 (on like 120 now).

need to stretch that page number up to 200+ to maximise profit senpai.

I read first 50 pages ish too, looks like I should quit while it's still been a good read in my mind. I wish these people would just publish collections of short thoughts 20-30 pages long instead of sticking to one idea hammering it in every time. It's not a novel. Poblem is expert waffling is rewarded in school, and then milked for profit in professional writing, so writing as a whole is a fucked profession

nonfiction texts are not frequently meant to be read cover to cover. they are opportunity for author to collect all thoughts on a subject

>yet he seems to be against all the methods humans have for dulling that very consciousness

Not only that, but Ligotti seems opposed to methods humans have for nakedly opening up consciousness as well, hence his screed against his facile understanding of 'enlightenment'.

That's just Bangkok though. The capital and the coast towns for tourists are degenerate cesspits. Deeper into the country you can't even drink or kiss a woman publicly.