Reddit reviews My Struggle: Book 1

May I recommend the first pages of My Struggle by Karl Ove Knausgard? It's a similarly beautiful mediation on society's relationship with the body.

I am reading volume 1 of Karl Ove Knausgaard's six-volume My Struggle novel, and he is probably one of the most emotionally direct authors I've read. You really get inside his head throughout multiple phases of his life.

Sgo

Fine, I apologize. Thank you for summarizing your main argument. It's an honest mistake to focus in on other details when I find them particularly interesting.

Let me post the definition of Intuition from Dictionary.com so we are on the same page when it comes to the nature of intuition.

noun

1. direct perception of truth, fact, etc., independent of any reasoning process; immediate apprehension.
   
   2.a fact, truth, etc., perceived in this way.
   
   3.a keen and quick insight.
   
   4.the quality or ability of having such direct perception or quick insight.
   
   5.Philosophy.an immediate cognition of an object not inferred or determined by a previous cognition of the same object.
   any object or truth so discerned. pure, untaught, noninferential knowledge.
   
   
2. Linguistics. the ability of the native speaker to make linguistic judgments, as of the grammaticality, ambiguity, equivalence, or nonequivalence of sentences, deriving from the speaker's native-language competence.
   
   Now, as you can see the definitions offered do not make judgement on this form of cognition. Gut Instinct is a form of Intuition but it's only one form; there are higher forms of intuition. The point I'm making, and I hope it does respond to your summarized main point, is that intuition like creativity is demeaned by some Scientific members as a lower, plebeian form of analysis.
   
   The prejudice is the masses live by intuition, we scientists must be counter-intuitive to rise above a standard of thinking that is refined. I am more of a Mathematician than I am a Scientist having studied Economics (hence the utilitarian prejudice I hold). To me and to other Mathematician's I have met the Art of Proof, Analysis, Elegance is an Intuitive Process. I can post an analysis I have made and show it comes strictly from intuition.
   
   Now, going back to Dictionary.com's definition if this gift existed in you wouldn't you tap into it? If you had a keen observation for the universe and first principles of intuition would you not tap into it? Remember the first definition shows: direct perception of truth. I suspect the problem is many Contemporary Scientists lack this gift so they assume it does not exist.
   
   Going back to the main subject, Gay Theory and Homosexuality in World War II. Isn't it odd the statement in effect is made, "wouldn't it be great if this was read in enlightened times?" Isn't it odd their letters were never read by their superiors who would have condemned homosexuality? Isn't it odd in the plethora investigation of World War II this is coming to light in a particularly Homophobic period. Intuitively, there are so many things that don't add up I am suspicious of it and prone to disregard it.
   
   Edit:
   
   Now, in regards to this particular matter. Add awareness of this 6 VOLUME SERIES called My Struggle which is a completely fictionalization of the gay experience presented as complete persecution by society with a supremacist tinge to compensate and you get a better idea of the matter:
   
   https://www.amazon.com/My-Struggle-Karl-Ove-Knausgaard/dp/0374534144/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1504381642&sr=8-2&keywords=Karl+Ove+Knausg%C3%A5rd%2C
   
   Then add a Google Search Results with, "Gay Theory My Struggle," or, "Gay Theory My Suffering." (not just for Gays, but for Minorities Ethnic and Religious, so you can type Hispanic Theory My Struggle or My Suffering, I am Hispanic) and find tailored results of propaganda. Here is a result:
   
   https://www.google.com/search?q=Hispanic+Theory+My+Suffering&oq=Hispanic+Theory+My+Suffering&gs_l=psy-ab.3...135129.138578.0.138816.28.16.0.0.0.0.432.1779.1j5j1j1j1.9.0.foo%2Cnso-ehuqi%3D1%2Cnso-ehuui%3D1%2Cewh%3D0%2Cnso-mplt%3D2%2Cnso-enksa%3D0%2Cnso-enfk%3D1%2Cnso-usnt%3D1%2Cnso-qnt-npqp%3D0-1633%2Cnso-qnt-npdq%3D0-5608%2Cnso-qnt-npt%3D0-1229%2Cnso-qnt-ndc%3D2051%2Ccspa-dspm-nm-mnp%3D0-06145%2Ccspa-dspm-nm-mxp%3D0-153625%2Cnso-unt-npqp%3D0-1506%2Cnso-unt-npdq%3D0-4694%2Cnso-unt-npt%3D0-061%2Cnso-unt-ndc%3D300%2Ccspa-uipm-nm-mnp%3D0-007625%2Ccspa-uipm-nm-mxp%3D0-053375%2Ccfro%3D1...0...1.1.64.psy-ab..19.7.1496...0j0i22i30k1j33i22i29i30k1j33i160k1j33i21k1.q08uVCil_do
   
   
   Now, intuitively look at the results they never include any of the words written in the search. So, how do you explain that? What seems inferential is often just rationalization when presented with a contrary reality because all evidence is there.