Lets talk about literature.

Discussion in 'Philosophy' started by PublicEnemy20, Oct 20, 2013.

  1. I finished reading Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoevsky not too long ago, and it's been running circles in my head for a couple of weeks now. Any Dostoevsky fans? 
     
    If there are any McCarthy fans out there, I'd love to talk about Blood Meridian. One hell of a novel.
     
    If there is any piece of literature that has gripped you as of lately, please share! 
     
     
     
     

     
  2. #2 Boats And Hoes, Oct 20, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 20, 2013
    Wittgenstein said Kierkegaard was, “By far the most profound thinker of the 19th century.” That's a lot coming from Wittgeinstein... and he's right. Kierkegaard is by far one the greatest thinkers to be found anywhere; and this book allowed me to truly understand that.
     
    [​IMG]
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. #3 Ryan1411, Oct 20, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 20, 2013
    [​IMG]
     
     
    This is the best book I have ever read. If you want to know the fundamentals of deductive logic, this book is for you. It will teach you what makes an argument deductively valid -- a crucial role in argumentation. It will teach you the difference between a sound an unsound argument and it will teach you how to tell the difference between a set of consistent statements and a set of inconsistent statements. It gives a thorough treatment of sentential logic, predicate logic, and relational predicate logic. You will learn about identity and the philosophical problems of symbolic logic, and it devotes a final chapter to the traditional Aristotelian logic. It teaches you how to construct truth tables and truth trees, but most importantly it gives you a thorough lesson on natural deduction, and provided are 18 valid argument forms, plus a study on conditional and indirect proofs, and quantifier rules for predicate logic. It has plenty of exercises in translating English sentences into a formal symbolic language, and it also has plenty of exercises in natural deduction proofs.

    It's presentation is thorough, technical and rigorous, yet the author does a beautiful job in making it easy to read. No former knowledge in logic or mathematics necessary. I guarantee that once finished, you will be enlightened! [​IMG]

    I recommenced this book to everyone. 10/10 indeed.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  4. I dig Dostoevsky. But I didn't care for Crime and Punishment, though. I thought it was boring, actually. But I really loved his novel Demons. If you haven't read it yet, I strongly suggest you give it a look through. The book reflects the political climate of Russia at the time and Dostoevsky loads it with off-the-wall characters with fucked up personal philosophies, including a nihilist who believes that killing himself will prove he's his own god. How can you go wrong with something like that?
     
    • Like Like x 2
  5. I don't read much Russian lit. I am not a big fan, tbh.

    However, I love Cormac McCarthy. I think the post apocalyptic genre is overdone but the Road was sick.
     
  6. Brief abstract? 
     
  7. The Road made this man melt into tears. 
     
  8. What a coincidence. I was scanning through my school library catalog and seeing what's in stock for Dostoevsky, and Demons and Notes from the Underground are finally available! Hope no one picks them up in the next day or so. 
     
  9.  
    Currently reading Blood Meridian based on your reccomendation.

    Loving it.
     
  10. Keep going! You won't regret it, I promise.


    Sent from my iPhone using Grasscity Forum mobile app
     
  11. #11 Boats And Hoes, Oct 26, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 26, 2013
     
    According to Kierkegaard, the "self" is a synthesis or relation between possibility and necessitiy, between the infinite and finitiude, between unlimited imagination and physical limitation, i.e., between freedom and determinancy.
     
    Man's wretchedness and despair are results of the self not discovering that it is a self; a result of not discerning this self - this self is a relation which relates itself to itself.
     
    For Kierkegaard, the genius that he was, "there are three kinds of despair: being unconscious in despair of having a self, not wanting in despair to be oneself, and wanting in despair to be oneself.
     
    The first of these is described as "inauthentic despair," because this despair is born out of ignorance. In this state one is unaware that one has a self separate from its finite reality. One does not realize that there is a God, and accepts finitude because one is unaware of the possibility of being more than physical determinancy and limitation; this first form of despair is that "which is ignorant of being in despair, or the despairing ignorance of having a self and an eternal self." - similar to the "unexamined life" of Socrates, this is the unexamined self; and for Kierkegaard, this is the most common despair, though the individuals involved aren't aware of it. The second type of despair is refusing to accept the self outside of immediacy; only defining the self by immediate, finite terms. This is the state in which one realizes that one has a self, but wishes to lose this painful awareness by arranging one's finite life so as to make the realization unnecessary. The third type is awareness of the self but refusal to submit to the will of God. In this stage, one accepts the eternal and may or may not acknowledge the Creator, but he or she refuses to accept an aspect of the self that one in reality is, that is to say, the self that one has been created to be."
     
    Liberation entails the depletion of anxiety and despair of the soul (as Kierkegaard would say). To not be in despair is to have reconciled the finite with the infinite, to exist in awareness of one's own self and of God. "In relating itself (the self) to itself, and in willing to be itself, the self rests transparently in the power that established it."
     
  12. This is the most boring and useless book ever in my opinion. I just had a unit on all you described in this book, and it was the biggest waste of my life.
     
    The ability to use logic in arguments doesn't have to be taught if people simply thought about what they were saying.
     
    To compartmentalize a method of determining the soundness of an argument and the workings of deductive logic is beyond pointless.
     
    But then again, each persons brain works differently. Some people must have an inability to judge an argument based on logic.
     
  13. Wow, I may have to actually check this out. From your description, sounds like Kierkegaard is trying to reconcile Christianity with existential themes? Mixing black and white matter I suppose, but I could be wrong, especially since I think Kierkegaard wrote before the existentialist movement got on its feet, even though he's considered by many as the father of existentialism. 
     
    The finite and infinite themes are hard to grasp from the description, but seem promising. This second kind of despair seems like it has a lot has to do with existential crisis as well, only defining the self by finite terms. 
     
    How is the difficulty of the reading? Like close to the Hegel side of the spectrum? I think I can use some lighter reading as of lately, planning on tackling Infinite Jest over winter break. 
     
  14. #14 Boats And Hoes, Oct 27, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 27, 2013
     
    1.) There's a reason he's called the "father of existentialism" - as you already know.
     
    2.) Kierkegaard was actually one of Hegel's biggest critics! And, yet, at the same time, Hegel was one of Kierkegaards biggest influence's; deeming him the greatest speculative thinker to have dabbled with philosophy (in all of Europe's history). But, Kierkegaard says that Hegel was too fanatical, too cinematic. Kierkegaard even mocks Hegel's prose in the first page of "sickness unto death" (by emulating Hegel's signature prose) - imitation is the greatest form of flattery, so they say. Kierkegaard wanted philosophy to come back to the question of human existence, life and reality, and he disliked that it was becoming some objective abstract sport that leads to no avail, i.e., Kierkegaard reproached Hegel's conceptual tour-de-france - for that's all it was, mental masturbation with no life or fruits for human subjectivity and reality.
     
    Kierkegaard was christian, but I am no christian, yet I am a believer of the One God.
     
    P.S.
    If you enjoyed this review... go check out some the reviews on Amazon - they're quite worthy of notice.
     
  15.  
     
    I would suggest deductive logic first, and then other argumentation skills after that. But to each his own.
     
  16. Food of the gods - Terence McKenna


    Sent
     
  17. http://www.amazon.com/The-Image-Guide-Pseudo-Events-America/dp/0679741801
    "The Image: A guide to pseudo events in America" written in 1962. really good book. i feel like it's important to read stuff like this just to give our minds some balance since life is so media heavy these days, even if you don't watch TV. definitely has opened my mind to look at some thing differently, and certain chapters I dog-eared the fuck out of lol.
     
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page