I don't know wth i'm doing or why with this stuff. The authors
1) Write intentionally obscure
2) Assume you have read whatever they reference, because they are such sophistimicated philosophers and you should be as well. Bringing new ideas with little to no introduction
3) do (1) with an intent to induce a delerium in the reader
4) Write about ideas that they together may have contradicting opinions about
I can't help but laugh, be pissed off at myself and be in awe/fascination. Strikes my attention, there's a gravity to it.
Half of me attempts to push through the opacity. The other half pulls away, self talking "this is going to be a massive waste of time"
At least there's some enjoying the theater of it all and my own publically yielding to the delerium.
"Western society's innate herd instinct has allowed the government, the media, and even the principles of economics to take advantage of each person's unwillingness to be cut off from the group. What's more, those who have mental disorders may not be insane, but could be individuals in the purest sense, because they are by nature isolated from society." - back cover
#bookstr
View quoted note →
