Men Explain Lolita To Me

[Mark Kohut]

I heartily second " to know the weight of thought that needs to go behind drawing a conclusion. 
And, subset: the right way to generalize. Logical truths. 

Sent from my iPad

> On Dec 17, 2015, at 8:24 PM, Tommy Pinecone <endaflynn345 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I had originally extended that message to cover that point but then decided to take it away.
> 
> To show the weight of thought that needs to go behind a conclusion. Kant is astoundingly painstaking, as you likely know. That's why I recommended a short introduction, the excerpts can be shocking to someone not used to it, it is an education you are not likely to find anywhere else apart from first hand in Kant. I could just as easily recommended some of Aristotle's work, but Kant is more illustrative of the point.
> 
> Wittgenstein's big ideas and posthumous work are constructive in a similar way.
> 
>> On 18 Dec 2015 01:09, "Danny Weltman" <danny.weltman at gmail.com> wrote:
>> What in Kant's first critique do you find helpful for hitting on "a fast track way to make someone who is uneducated aware of the blatant flaws in certain ideas and movements that are just unsustainable, and somehow having their day the past few years?"
>> 
>>> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Tommy Pinecone <endaflynn345 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> This is why I make it a deliberate priority not to go on Twitter or to follow any new intellectual voices.
>>> 
>>> Every time it is some unfamiliar, alleged authority voicing a loud opinion that's appointed a flashy title; for some reason Twitter is frequently mentioned along the way.
>>> 
>>> I hope the majority of you can see through this pettiness. It's unfortunate that we are swamped with the hack work and profound blanketed hate in modern academia, it is however a fortunate thing that we can merely look away and concentrate on human issues instead of coining new derogatory terms and stirring up the rabble with a short article.
>>> 
>>> I often wonder how different these outlooks would be if these people were introduced to literature in a different way, free from ideology and identity-that is an unbiased, philosophical way. I make it a hard point with any aspiring student to start off with a short introduction to Kant's primary Critique and a short introduction to Wittgenstein's thought; no doubt it is an anomalous approach, but it's a fast track way to make someone who is uneducated aware of the blatant flaws in certain ideas and movements that are just unsustainable, and somehow having their day the past few years.
>>> 
>>> We shouldn't have to pause to think of these things when there are bigger issues than female characters not being put in the center of the stage. What if I wanted to pen an article on how I wasn't happy with the lack of empathy Beckett shows in all of his works, to individuals of both genders no less? Sure, the circumstances are different here, but not dramatically. It's simply absurd. I struggle to believe these type of things when I see them being taken so seriously by so many. Makes one feel hopeless, especially when these are still the early years of the internet and the loudest voices are reaching aspiring students through social media poisoning their nascent opinions and thoughts.
>>> 
>>>> On 17 Dec 2015 20:51, "Matthew Taylor" <matthew.taylor923 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Thoughts on Rebecca Solnit's latest?
>>>> 
>>>> http://lithub.com/men-explain-lolita-to-me/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20151218/7be7c44c/attachment.html>