Hi Veeky Forums I am writing an for my literature class and I was thinking about discussing elements of dystopia in our...

>calling other people worthless
Ironic. I do everything for my mother's poor soul so don't you fucking dare speak about shit you will never know. Conversations over, bye.

>I don't want my professor to think I am autistic when I make parallels between dystopian novels and our society. (e.g. NSA surveillance, privacy vs security, etc).
Orwell was right you know. Hi. 1984 was made mainstream education so that people become numb to the truth

It's funny because this post implies that I shouldn't be calling other people worthless when I'm worthless myself, but then you go and complain that I shouldn't "fucking dare" speak about shit I don't know about when you know just as little about me as I do about you.

So you're not just worthless, you're a hypocrite and a retard as well.

You should be more careful with what you say so you don't make a fool of yourself. But it's too late now.

Attached: 1521159449268.png (736x527, 31K)

school today is a waste of time. work on a ranch in utah with the mormons instead

Me again. The only thing Orwell was wrong about was you need to give people the illusion of choice for it all to work.

I'm planning to become a doctor these are just electives. Relax dude, what's bothering you?

>Relax dude, what's bothering you?
I fucking hate academics and universities.

Well I am neither.

May I ask why? Bad experience?

No, I'm saying that calling people worthless at all is a worthless behavior. I'm not complaining either. You are correct that I spoke bad about your character just as you did mine, but it's hard for me abide by someone who is discouraging someone from doing something they might be interested in. It's never too late.

>May I ask why? Bad experience?
I did a philosophy degree and regret every minute of it.

Fortunately I recovered from my retardation and am now gainfully employed in an unrelated field, but all that's done is make me realise that the fault wasn't mine (for a long time I blamed myself). Cloistered academics are literally (not figuratively) the LAST people who should be pretending they have the answer to any of life's questions. "Writers" are rarely better.

And all of this indulgence is funded from my taxes.

To add insult to injury, as soon as you criticise this philosophers will turn around and tell you all about the "valuable" work that they do. If it's so fucking valuable why can't they fund it privately? Not to mention
>5000 years of recorded philosophy
>0 (zero) definite conclusions reached
>0 (zero) practical applications developed for the "knowledge" so gained

In short, university is a waste of time. It should be split into research facilities for the research and technical colleges for the professions. The rest can fund itself privately, and if it's worth half a shit that shouldn't be a problem for it.

Watch now as the philosophers, writers, and other "important people" come out reeing about having their gravy train taken away. The idea of having to actually work for a living repulses them. Easier just to get gibs at gunpoint from the unwashed masses while whinging about the "corrupt" system that they perpetuate.

>wagies butthurt other people don't want to be wagies
enjoy that sleep deprivation and lack of leisure time, m80

Attached: laughing.png (449x401, 490K)

stay angry wagecuck

Attached: wagecuck.jpg (480x360, 17K)

>half our paychecks
lol no one who makes under 125k in the US pays more than 30% in taxes you dumb nigger and they just cut taxes on the upper 10% and capital gains fucking dumb ancap
>muh theft
all the neat companies you work for and techne you live your life with were funded with tax payer money in their nascent stages of development. universities and corps funded by subsidies make everything you care about
>production will stop climate change, species extinction, loss of unrenewable resources, creeping police state and dysgenics+psychosis
no

>in the US
Operative phrase, user.

>all the neat companies you work for and techne you live your life with were funded with tax payer money in their nascent stages of development
None of the people involved in that development were philosophers.

>>production will stop climate change, species extinction, loss of unrenewable resources, creeping police state and dysgenics+psychosis
>philosophers will stop climate change, species extinction, loss of unrenewable resources, creeping police state and dysgenics+psychosis
no

Honestly I agree with you and its hard to argue with someone who already has a degree. But isn't there value in things people enjoy? In people just thinking about stuff and liking to?

University is not a waste of time if you intend on going into research or obtaining a professional degree like I am. I am sorry you wasted your time and money on a useless philosophy degree but I didn't make the same mistake as you. University is actually great and I've had a lot of fun times and I'm studying stuff I am genuinely interested in and fascinated by (again this literature course is just an elective, I would never major in literature). University is necessary if you intend to get into certain fields especially science/social science. You're upset you made a mistake, it's not the end of the world. Explore law or medicine perhaps. Consider writing the LSAT (philosophy majors do the best on this exam), taking some science electives and writing the MCAT or something similar. Or just be content with whatever you have going on and best of luck to you. There is no need to take out your anger and frustration on people on the internet anonymously because you resent them for being younger and not making the same mistakes you made.

ninety percent of those people had a college education you stupid faggot

I hope you realize OP is writing an essay for a mandatory general education course. This is either bait or you're projecting really hard.

>But isn't there value in things people enjoy? In people just thinking about stuff and liking to?
Of course, and if people value those things they will be willing to pay for them.

I'm not saying cut all funding to everything ever. I'm not some sort of crazy factory efficiency algorithm somehow given sapience that wants to turn the Mona Lisa into roughage for the glue that holds the soles of your shoes on. I want to live in a beautiful world just as much as anyone else. But I am incensed when philosophers try to tell me their field is as worthy of government money as the kidney hypoxia research my mother used to do before the government research grant got cut.

Why the FUCK is the philosophy school still open when we can no longer afford research into kidney hypoxia?

>"wow r u just whining about this because ur mother lost her job"
No, it's just the first example that springs to mind.

>University is not a waste of time if you intend on going into research or obtaining a professional degree like I am
If the only part of university that isn't a waste of time is research or professional training, why do we fund ALL of university instead of just those two things.

Daily reminder that only about 10% of "social sciences" research has reproducible results.

>ninety percent of those people had a college education you stupid faggot
And I have never once in this entire thread said that tertiary education as a whole should be done away with, you stupid faggot.

You realize that "kidney hypoxia research" is probably funded by the NIH, right? An organization that spends and receives precisely zero dollars on philosophy research. While I'm sorry about your mother, the fact that that research grant got cut has absolutely nothing to do with philosophers.

>NIH
I seriously doubt it, considering that's a US institution.

you blamed tertiary education for stealing your tax dollars, even though it's a rounding error of the money you actually pay to the US government

wagies will go to some truly insane lengths to justify their own delusions won't they?

>you blamed tertiary education for stealing your tax dollars
No I didn't.

>even though it's a rounding error of the money you actually pay to the US government
I don't pay any money to the US government.

Dystopia is basically maintaining the positive elements of society as they are and the logically extending the more malicious power elements into their logical termini. It operates on the same paradigm that Kafka works, but Kafka extended prosaic activities to the point of eeriness by either repetition or more time/accentuating the disparities.

I don't get what you mean about government money? For me I believe philosophy and understanding helps to guide ideas. Like you said, why is the philosophy school open when we can't afford research, maybe its because people don't know or hold beneficial philosophies that would help them see the value in wanting to help people and fund that research. Does that make sense? Your comments really struck me and I was way too over the top before I really do appreciate that. The whole fart sniffing thing hits really close to home. I'd like to learn what I can from you, don't tech/philosophy compliment each other? To what end is technology worth if not to ultimately give people all the things they need right? And philosophy can help shed light on that and even give people things like hope and perspective that is needed too right?

Also what do you mean about your mother losing her job???

sorry, you really sound like a burger.

You're fortunate enough to live in a country that actually spends money on its universities and you're bitching about your tax dollars being misappropriated? I'm so sorry to hear that you don't have a president who has wasted $58 million on golfing, and that there are some people who deign to get an education you don't like. I'll go tell that to the hundreds of thousands of Business/Psychology majors driving up the tuition at my public university who are only here to waste their parents' money getting drunk. I'm sure that if I keep going around, asking people how they feel, I'll find someone who feels sorry for you, you braindead firstworlder

>I don't get what you mean about government money?
Universities are funded in three ways by the government here. First, the government directly gives them a fat stack of cash. Secondly, the government pays for research grants. Thirdly, the government pays half the tuition of every student up-front, and loans the other half to the student for them to pay back later on an interest-free loan after they're earning above a certain threshold.

All of this money combines with the private-paying international students.

>For me I believe philosophy and understanding helps to guide ideas
You can believe that, but it doesn't make it true. The people making decisions about what to fund and what to buy are not using philosophy to inform their decisions. The Minister consults his polls, not his Pufendorf, when allocating funds. The people who are polled aren't philosophers, they're just average joes. So you can see how there is a connected chain from the average uninformed layman all the way through to university funding decisions which philosophers never enter in to. Philosophers don't inform our decisions on what research to fund at all. The choice between kidney hypoxia research for 2 years or a new radio imaging machine is made by the head of the institute, and the decision to give him that funding is made by the grants council, and the people in the grants council who make that decision are a combination of bureaucrats and professionals. The amount of money the grants council gets to grant is a decision made by the Minister, and he decides based on his party and polls. None of these people are philosophers.

Philosophers just sit in their little cloister and whine, and the world moves on around them.

>To what end is technology worth if not to ultimately give people all the things they need right?
People don't need to be told what they need.

>Also what do you mean about your mother losing her job???
Nothing, it was just that the decision was made not to continue to fund the research that the institute she worked at was doing, so the researchers all had to find other jobs, which she did. Don't worry about it, it was just an example.

>I'm so sorry to hear that you don't have a president who has wasted $58 million on golfing, and that there are some people who deign to get an education you don't like.
Apology accepted.

>People don't need to be told what they need.

That's why marketing executives get paid so much, right?

Are you implying the world would collapse without marketing executives?

just write about consumerism and how we're all massive drug addicts who've come to fetishize our meaningless existence as we steal from our grandmothers purse of faith to fund porn and priuses and shit

Modern research methods in psychology for example utilizes statistical analysis. Sociology is largely bullshit and full of results that can't be reproduced but psychology especially has changed dramatically in the last couple decades.

> I am incensed when philosophers try to tell me their field is as worthy of government money as the kidney hypoxia research
You're a living symptom of the west's retarded fear of death and faustian quest for eternal infancy. You'd sacrifice purpose for duration and therefore deserve none.

No, I'm pointing out that you're a hypocrite. Sermonizing endlessly about how "pointless" philosophy is and how it's a drain on your government's money when the only reason you'd ever care about that is because you live in a capitalist dystopia of manufactured scarcity where media executives tell you to blame "decadent wasteful parasites" like (people who study philosophy?) for the fallout of global capitalism.

You're deluded. You're spending time posting on a literature board about how literature and philosophy are meaningless, all so you can nurse your own delusions about the economy. Just stop.

A lot of interesting stuff you're saying, especially about the choice between kidney research vs new machines. But what about the huge defense budget and all the large abundances certain people have and don't pay forward? Whether statistics are misleading or not can't they be analyzed at a meta-level to where fruitless endeavors aren't funded so much? Things like guns and tanks and such, do you believe there isn't much to be said about redirecting that kind of money to harmonizing things? I'm not saying philosopher would make decisions, far from it actually, I'm saying they would help people want to keep the community's interests in mind more. And i know people don't need to be told what they need wholeheartedly, but isn't it still fun to speak up about the things you need? Just to be a human you know? not in a complaining way, but in like, I need loving and supportive friends who love life and discussions, I need beautiful things like music and family and harmony, stuff like that. not to try and prove anything but to show others what you like in hopes they find some happiness in it too? I'm sorry to hear about your mom, obviously I'm passionate about my mom's position too.

How do your farts smell?

>Sermonizing endlessly about how "pointless" philosophy is and how it's a drain on your government's money when the only reason you'd ever care about that is because you live in a capitalist dystopia of manufactured scarcity where media executives tell you to blame "decadent wasteful parasites" like (people who study philosophy?) for the fallout of global capitalism.
This is a sentence fragment.

>the only reason you'd ever care about that is because
because I have to look, every fucking week, at my paycheck, and watch as half of what I earn is taken away from me.

Now, I can bear that, when it's for a good cause. I understand that we need the state. But fart-sniffing is not a good cause.

In short, I want my money back.

your professor has heard all this highschool shit before, do something interesting for once

>Cloistered academics are literally (not figuratively) the LAST people who should be pretending they have the answer to any of life's questions. "Writers" are rarely better.
WTF are you doing on a subreddit for writers

>But what about the huge defense budget and all the large abundances certain people have and don't pay forward?
Again, the same is true. These questions can be answered "philosophically" (in as much as philosophy ever draws a conclusion), but the people who actually answer them aren't philosophers, and aren't informed by philosophers.

I'm not saying "don't do philosophy." If you want to do philosophy, or you want to put your own money towards philosophy, then whatever. It's literally your money, so why would I care. I'm saying don't put MY money towards philosophy, without giving me a choice, and then tell me that the reason it's justified is because philosophers are important contributors to society. They're simply not. Philosophers live in their own world while the business of government - of life itself - continues around them. Philosophers spend so long thinking about life that they forget that some people actually need to fucking live it. Not philosophers though. Everything they need gets given to them by the government.

Whining.

except for the number of political philosophers and other miscellaneous academics who actually do attempt to answer these problems, who you have discredited

>except for the number of political philosophers and other miscellaneous academics who actually do attempt to answer these problems
Yes, but none of them were ever in a position to implement their answers.

The people in those positions aren't philosophers.

careful
>at my paycheck, and watch as half of what I earn is taken away from me
no you don't
>Now, I can bear that, when it's for a good cause. I understand that we need the state. But fart-sniffing is not a good cause
Go talk to Stanford and Exxon, DARPA and MIT, Lockheed Martin and the DoD you dumb fucking faggot lolbert

I mean like, if people were happier with the things they had learned and wanted to foster positive things wouldn't their be less need for things like military budget? For me philosophy isn't a career or something you put money into its just sharing ideas and trying to get everybody into an "all in this together" type mindset specifically so things like technology and research can be focused on over stupid stuff like killing each other, does that make sense? It should be a free-time, pass-time thing, I think its just important to encourage. I feel like people are prone to unhappiness, like when you discourage people from trying is exactly when they become distraught and whiny and in their own world, because people aren't helping them get out of it. idk bro

philosophy is the ruling school over all of other bodies of thought, no economist, political "scientist", psychologist or politician is allowed to take up their profession without reference to it, ontology is found in mathematical and scientific journals constantly, epistemology is incredibly important to the study of AI it is not simply a pass-time that you know so little about its contemporary uses is pretty telling that you should not at all be the one advocating for it and that you haven't cock stomped this pseud into the ground is all the evidence I need to convict you of being a pseud

>none of them were ever in a position to implement their answers.

what is marxism-leninism?

well, maybe it's because people like you dismiss them as figurative "fart sniffers?" Or at least, maybe your attitude is part of the reason why the free world is run by businessmen and their retarded nephews while academics are sequestered away answering useless questions about semiotics or whatever it is.

I don't know, I'm not a philosopher. But your argument seems silly and self-contradictory. If you really care about waste and government expenditure, there are better targets than the fraction of your country's budget used to pay research grants for philosophers. If you're angry that philosophy is "useless," you're ignoring the practical applications of philosophy - and in so doing, making philosophy useless.

It really seems like you've chosen to disdain philosophy before the fact and no matter what we bring up you're just going to keep digging your heels in. It's pointless to argue with you.

>My advice would be stop taking literature classes and get a real job.

Why are you even on this board if you don’t value literature?
Also, do you really think most of your taxes are going to these “lazy” people? Seriously, look up where tax money goes. Most of it is not going to the poor.
Also
>complains about people just using dystopias to demonize things they don’t like
>does the same thing later in the comment
y-you’re being ironic, r-right?

Attached: 7FD5E193-B6B4-469E-8B88-B81D31CEA137.jpg (764x800, 56K)

Fair enough user. You can think that as much as you like, but when you start asking people to come around to my house and take my money to spend on your thoughts I will become irate, because I don't think philosophy assists with what you said. The reason I don't think that philosophy helps like you've said it does is because the people who make the decisions you're referring to make those decisions without any input from philosophy.

>i'm not an economist, psychologist, politician, scientist, or software developer, BUT LET ME TELL YOU HOW IMPORTANT PHILOSOPHY IS TO THOSE FIELDS
>you're not a philosopher, SO YOU DON'T GET TO HAVE OPINIONS ON THE TOPIC
The fallacious and laughable "argument" of the buttmad academic.

>what is marxism-leninism?
Not exactly a shining example of philosopher-led government, and the USSR was quickly co-opted by the usual suspects anyway.

>If you really care about waste and government expenditure, there are better targets than the fraction of your country's budget used to pay research grants for philosophers.
Don't worry, I'm plenty mad about them as well.

>If you're angry that philosophy is "useless," you're ignoring the practical applications of philosophy - and in so doing, making philosophy useless.
There is no practical application of philosophy.

>It really seems like you've chosen to disdain philosophy before the fact
My disdain has been carefully cultivated over years of grappling with the sunk cost fallacy relating to my degree.

>It's pointless to argue with you.
Why? Because it's all just a matter of opinion in the end? Because you'll never be able to conclusively demonstrate that I'm wrong?

That's why philosophy is pointless.

>Why are you even on this board if you don’t value literature?
I don't value literature CLASSES that I pay for and other people attend.

>Also, do you really think most of your taxes are going to these “lazy” people
Certainly some of them do.

>y-you’re being ironic, r-right?
Yes, that's correct.

Your topic is a little cliche, but you can make it work if you don't relate everything to Huxley and Orwell.

For philosophical insight, read Nick Land, Mark Fisher, and Baudrillard.For classical literary insight, read The Grand Inquisitor as well.

>You should be more careful with what you say so you don't make a fool of yourself. But it's too late now.

Do you really think that this board is looking at this conversation and thinking he’s the one that is embarrassing himself? I don’t understand how you can be such a gross combination of stupid and bitter.

>Literature class is a waste of time. If OP wants to learn how to be a better writer take a grammar/syntax course.

Do you really think that the greatest writers just knew a lot about grammar and syntax? That they never read other great writers to learn from them? I don’t understand how anyone can be this retarded.
>Literature class is a waste of time.

Again, why are you on this board? I don’t go to Veeky Forums to shit on people for playing video games. What’s wrong with people having hobbies outside of work? Also at least literature leads to skills that help in work (reading and writing), unlike most hobbies. Not saying those other hobbies deserve hate, because I think that it’s ok to not have every second of your day dedicated to sucking your boss’s cock, but seriously, why hate on people who just like to read? It helps them enjoy life, what’s wrong with that? Do you have any idea how much of an asshole you look like?

>Do you really think that the greatest writers just knew a lot about grammar and syntax?
Some of the best writing I've seen doesn't even have good grammar and syntax.

Good writing is compelling because it's authentic and revelatory.

Literature class can't help you with that.

Attached: protect me.jpg (1399x992, 591K)

>There is no practical application of philosophy.

But you just conceded that philosophy can be applied to make governments!

I think the problem is we're comparing apples and oranges. Philosophy is a broad field of study and what you're doing is essentially like calling writing "pointless" based on the merits of people who write fan fiction. There are certainly useless philosophers out there but I don't think all philosophers are useless.

I think if you took the time to look at actual philosophy journals there are some genuinely interesting, meaningful works being published.

you're bringing up unironically good points in the defense of a completely fucking moronic argument

can we discuss your picrelated instead of this?

>But you just conceded that philosophy can be applied to make governments!
If governments of equal or better ability can be formed without philosophers then clearly the application of philosophers in informing how to make a government approaches nil.

Philosophy without philosophers is no longer philosophy in my mind, then. Just common sense and experience.

Sorry guys I'm not really follow what you're saying at all. Thanks for the discourse regardless

I don't think any capable government can be formed without philosophers. The concept of a western liberal democracy did not exist as a whole until it was developed by people who just so happened to call themselves philosophers. Before that, philosophers wrote to justify the existence of monarchies. I think there's more importance to political philosophy than you let on.

I think that liberal democracy first emerged as an idea, and then philosophers wrote about it.

A philosopher can't sincerely produce a work he doesn't believe in. Thus we see for anyone to write about liberal democracy sincerely they first have to believe in it. This belief has to come from somewhere. Maybe it comes from a revelatory insight only accessible to the Ubermensch philosopher. I think more likely it comes from their lived experiences. Seeing as we all live in the same world and the probability that the circumstances of one person's life are unique is remote it's inevitable that other people will live similar experiences. Probably a lot of other people.

Philosophers write to justify what they already believe.

This explains why we don't see the emergence of nationalism before the mass communication technology that makes nationalism possible.

"New" philosophical ideas are just a codification of an already extant shift in the norms of the society that produces the philosopher - but when a layman wakes up in the morning and thinks "man I wish I didn't have such a shitty fucking government" nobody cares. When a philosopher writes a 700 page doorstop that boils down to "man I wish I didn't have such a shitty fucking government" everybody flips their shit.

>"but the philosopher provides solutions, the layman only complains"
This might have merit if it wasn't the laymen who end up fixing the government in the end - by and large without the input of philosophers.

>Keep it apolitical, if possible.
Balls, write the next Atlas Shrugged