What's one of the biggest "elephants in the room" that no one talks about regarding modern philosophy and literature...

He's mostly remembered through Marx, but i dont see Stirner really addressing any devastating issues that philosophy cant deal with.

Elephants in the room:

> Extreme sexual fetishes
> What to do with pedos
> What to do with the mentally ill in general
> Nations made up of anti-nationalists
> Boys in relationships with much older women
> Self destruction

> Nations made up of anti-nationalists
Thats just gonna lead to collapse, pretty obvious.
> Boys in relationships with much older women
hmmm

No problem at all. Evolution and it's pressures will clean them off the surface of the earth. It wont be nice till it will happen and it will cyclicaly come back, but such is life.

Read Biohistor by Penman.

Sounds interesting but i have a feeling im falling for a scam. Sell me on it.

You can read Penman for free online. Anti-Natalists and other non-reproductive creatures will cease the reproductive battle sooner than later by necessity. The optimaly reproductive ones, aka the normal ones, will prevail. Disfunction can only presist for a short decadent time.

>What's one of the biggest "elephants in the room" that no one talks about regarding modern philosophy and literature, or hell, all of academia.
The hatred of dualism is rooted in knee-jerk reactions rather than true insight. Many philosophers say "dualism" like it's a kind of sin without ever inspecting why.

What kind of dualism in particular? Mind-Body?

the blank slate is fucking retarded cope and three generations of academia which has pretended otherwise needs to be thrown in the garbage

The arts have spent the better part of 70 years, at least, ignoring the very basic fact that harmony is pleasing and lack of harmony is not. This is everywhere, from free verse in modern poetry to atonality in modern music.

It all fucking sucks. Over and over again, we humans are shown to really enjoy rhythm, rhyme, and regularity, and to not particularly enjoy the lack of these things. But the idiot universities and grant organizations continue to foist lack of harmony upon us in nearly all the arts, and then they wonder why nobody actually enjoys most recent works of music, literature, and visual art.

Attached: dl-portrait-npg-lord-byron.jpg (1530x2000, 370K)

quality post, brother

People who don't use question marks while asking questions.

Attached: 621A8D96-9E20-4521-9EC4-6E43D1F18459.png (500x404, 128K)

The entire fucking world is an "elephant in the room" to these people.

BASED

The reason people don’t enjoy modern music, film, and music is because the vast majority of it is reproducible generic garbage. When people decry modern art they aren’t talking about avant-garde media because they don’t even consume it, let alone know it exists

what are some good rhythmic rhyming poetry you would recommend?

Almost anything written before 1930. Even some of the free verse from the 20th Century has a pleasing, harmonic quality; Wallace Stevens' free verse is like this. Just pick any great pre-20th Century poet and you'll be in good shape.

It's really only after about 1945 that things start to go to shit.

Good post. Made a few effort posts on here over the years on similar lines. It's been integral for millenia, and now we discard it? Suspect it will be looked back on like that period in the 18th century when they kept trying to 'correct' Shakespeare

Adherence to form in art? Those sound like rules. Do you know who had rules governing art? The Nazis! You aren't a Nazi are you?
>t. typical Anglo-American Progressive

Nabokov being an obvious pedophile

I don't even know if that's the reason. I'm more of a blame late capitalist self centred laziness guy
>what, you mean I have to learn form/practice scales/develop technique first? I want to express myself fully right now without making an effort and have it praised

Thats not so big of a deal desu

I don't think that's really a good explanation. See Liszt's insane popularity for just one example. Other great composers were also pretty popular in their day. I'd like to think patronage would be a better model for art, but we just have intelligence agency patronage instead of royal patronage.

For normies it would be, they don’t read DFW because he threw a table at his gf.

Religion: a philosophy based on faith.
Faith: belief without empirical evidence.

The trade off between sexual activity and intellect.

>What's one of the biggest "elephants in the room" that no one talks about regarding modern philosophy and literature, or hell, all of academia.

The philosophical implications of Mein Kampf

Which are

People are often just too dumb, lazy, and uninterested to offer anything new to the field and collectively hinder others who are passionate. Same issue in all of the humanities.

I honestly feel like we could burn every piece of art that was created the last century, and murder every artist today, and not lose a single thing of value, outside of music.

You misunderstand, I don't mean audiences are lazy, I mean artists are lazy. It takes enormous effort and dedication to produce a Liszt, late capitalism has rendered such effort moot for both artist and audience

>late capitalism

Attached: penn_jillette.jpg (300x400, 31K)

>these people
who

>im ugly/insane so decentric heritability is false
Do you see?

>Decentric heritability

Attached: Bottomless.jpg (645x729, 57K)

I think this only really applies to Western philosophy, leading into the single largest elephant in the room
>Plato was wrong

Turns out we're not meat mechas being piloted by ghosts. More to the point, we just as much are phenomena as we study it. This user touches on it . There's an empirical reality (even if we can't actually get a perfect description of it), and we are very much influenced by it. To put it another way, whether we like it or not we're part of nature, not separate from it (I do not mean this in the sense of ecology).

So far as historiography goes, the origin of fascism as a syndicalist heterodoxy.

There have been many people inspecting why. In fact they're too many people going on about it. Have you even read any 20th century philosophy?

Attached: aztec_0.png (1853x456, 127K)