Do you feel more fulfilled for having read, Veeky Forums...

Do you feel more fulfilled for having read, Veeky Forums? For the first couple of years of studying literature I felt overwhelmed with curiosity, like I was a kid again. The more I read today, the less secure I feel. The more I've learned, the more I've come to learn that I know nothing. I literally feel as if my IQ has dropped twenty points. I should be humbled but instead I'm more afraid, more lonely and more hopeless.

What is the value of reading literature for you? Has it brought richness to your life?

bump

bump2

It's not a linear process, friend.

It comes and goes as does the wind.

Literature is supposed to sharpen your reasoning so you realize that philosophy is worth pursuing. That is where the benefits have come from for myself. I know way too many people that read fiction like teens watch porn. Excitement and entertainment are quickened death. So many of our favorite writers are philosophically inclined. Their goal, sometimes, is to lead us to that line of reasoning. This isn't advice or a set of 'you should's, this has just been my experience

when do I get out of this valley? It's been years :,(

what parts of philosophy do you utilize irl?

i don't "feel" anything anymore

Philosophy informs the way I see the world, the way I interact with people, the way I think. If it defines your principles, it changes your person. But more practically, the philosophy I appreciate helped me realize that a desk job is self-enforced hell and counterproductive with regard to what I want to achieve. Same thing with marriage. It gave me a goal that is greater than the ultimate goals of 99.9% of the population, and having this goal has given me a sense of purpose that is irreplaceable. Some of that stuff and other stuff. Just a bunch of stuff

There is a common idea stating that a large portion of the population do not use critical thinking. Naturally nobody believes this regarding themselves, or their group of friends, and so it seems nobody relevant to you is inflicted by this ailment.

Reading philosophy unironically (both meanings ;) ) makes you realize that you do not think nearly as much as you think you do and not on as many subjects.

Also, people read for entertainment and erudition. People with good taste do the same but with literature specifically. Philosophy might be taught of ( and same for other subjects like sociology, psychology, etc...) as strictly an ''erudition'' thing, but it can be beautiful too. I can think of passages of Plato that moved me for instance.

I remember loving literature as a kid to the point where I could read 1000+ page books in a few weeks since plot alone was enough to engage me.

Nowadays, I read short stories and novellas almost exclusively. Long books have become a slog to get through and a plot alone isn't enough to hold my attention. I actually enjoy reading less now than I did back then.

I feel much more fulfilled as a result of reading, yes

Entertainment, erudition, philosophical growth. Those three would make a good Venn diagram with Literature at the middle.

“When we read, another person thinks for us: we merely repeat his mental process. In learning to write, the pupil goes over with his pen what the teacher has outlined in pencil: so in reading; the greater part of the work of thought is already done for us. This is why it relieves us to take up a book after being occupied with our own thoughts. And in reading, the mind is, in fact, only the playground of another’s thoughts. So it comes about that if anyone spends almost the whole day in reading, and by way of relaxation devotes the intervals to some thoughtless pastime, he gradually loses the capacity for thinking; just as the man who always rides, at last forgets how to walk. This is the case with many learned persons: they have read themselves stupid.”
― Arthur Schopenhauer, Essays and Aphorisms

This blather is erroneous from the very first sentence. We as readers do far more than repeat that "mental process", as clearly evidenced by the wide spectrum of varying opinions, interpretations, and responses that separate readers have to the same book. Schopenhauer must have had an agenda to have written something so single-minded and foolish as that.

no
this website is sucking the joy of reading out of me
you're all a bunch of morons

>studying literature
>my IQ has dropped twenty points
That seems about right.

>a desk job is self-enforced hell
>Same thing with marriage
>gave me a goal that is greater than the ultimate goals of 99.9% of the population
>it's an incel neet rationalizes his inferiority episode
Becoming a wizard is not a great goal, sweetie.

I think studying philosophy, literature, and engineering has just made me unable to bond with other people. The more you come to understand how many things are wrong with the world and how much better things could be if every person just read and understood, for instance, Plato, the more depressed you become. I know most people tend to respond to these types of posts with "edgy", but it's all true. Becoming aware of how poor the world's situation is due to capitalism and technology is like opening Pandora's jar, because you will start to analyze all of the superficial interactions and behaviors around you

You have to balance. If literature's not working, take a break, travel or try and drum up cool stuff in your life. Books aren't supposed to be the only thing in your life.

It's not edgy. It's just teenage autism.

>Engineer is a complete autist and a pseud
Every single time. How do engineers do it?

I don't read for gainz any more, I read that which is worthwhile to read.

So I don't struggle through books to get things out of them, I only read books for which the act of reading them is an end in itself. Which leads a reading experience that is pleasurable and without pressure and silly ideas about progress and completionism tainting it.

>not going full meursault and enjoying simple things for the heck of it

Once you have a master's in mechanical engineering, have read the canon, and have an IQ of 140, you can post that pic in reference to me.

>engineering
>canon
>IQ

embarrassing.

>despite being objectively more intelligent than the majority of other people, you are just like them

Is this what you really think?

if you think a college degree, going through literature's greatest hits and being good at puzzles are enough to make you an exceptional human then that's a pretty good sign that you are not.

doing something exceptional makes you exceptional. all you've done so far is acquired a few banal tokens. don't expect people to think you're special just because you're above average on paper.

Whether you accept it or not, the average person is literally incapable or understanding a concept like fluid mechanics or vector calculus, regardless of how diluted the material is. If you really think being special and creative is more indicative of intelligence than the ability to comprehend difficult, abstract concepts and solve problems, than you are simply an idiot.

i admitted you're above average, but the whole 'tfw too intelligent to bond with people' thing is a bit rich.

even if you're in the top one percentile you're far from alone, organise your life in such a way that you get to spend it in a place where likeminded people congregate. surely you have the skills to make that happen.

if you can't bond with smart people either it's likely some other trait of yours that inhibits bonding and not intelligence.

this