I am slowly coming to terms with how full of shit everything and everyone is

I am slowly coming to terms with how full of shit everything and everyone is.

You can't even read a book and, after being bored to death by page 200, call it boring and go do something else. There are 9001 academics and journalists and other pseudointellectuals ready to call you a pleb.

I've read wealth of nations to page 200 and it's literally nothing but painstakingly slow anecdotes about increased supply lowering prices and decreased supply raising prices. It's boring as shit trivial anecdotes yet I will be called a pleb for saying that.

I am at about page 350 of a Dickens book and even though its paid by the word turgid aimless nonsense I will be called a pleb for saying that. Even though Dickens wrote for people with less formal education than 10 year olds today, pseudointellectuals pretend that reading him is a sign of intelligence and that you need ten PhDs to understand him. THAT is he high pseudointellectualism has progressed.

I read Plato and he spent 80 pages wondering whether names are just labels or whether they properly describe (or match) the nature of what they name... I'm not even fucking joking. Yet people will defend this.

I don't want to dwell on books but shit permeates everywhere.

My engineering degree was just introductory maths and physics and chemistry class plus a load of stamp collecting brain-dead corporate wagecuck training courses.

You're told that work is noble... yet people look down on me and laugh at me for working in a retailcuck job.

You are 90 % judged on what university you went to. My one was ranked in the world's top 150 (I only chose it because it was nearest to me) and I still feel like a prole who has been branded as an idiot.

I feel the same way about Hemingway desu

You sound like an idiot, OP.

I find it funny you are this made, son.

>I've read wealth of nations to page 200 and it's literally nothing but painstakingly slow anecdotes about increased supply lowering prices and decreased supply raising prices. It's boring as shit trivial anecdotes yet I will be called a pleb for saying that.
These anecdotes are important. It's important you understand the basis of Mercantilism because it will come in handy whenever you decide to study economics for any lengthy period of time, or even look into Marxism.

>I read Plato and he spent 80 pages wondering whether names are just labels or whether they properly describe (or match) the nature of what they name...
You did. Sounds interesting. Someone ought to define what they are talking about before they talk using the terms defined. I hate it when authors don't do that. Plato, being the cornerstone of philosophical academia defined terms incessantly in Greek, because it was important to lay out what was going to be the framework of the theories before the theories are developed.

When you really get into academia, about 20% of the papers at least are defining terms.

So what's the deal with /r9k/'s mass sperg-out today?

You also have to remember that we take a lot of those ideas for granted today, but a lot of ideas that seem trivial were actually pretty staggering at the time.

Dickens isn't important. Read Chesterton.

Dickens wrote that way because he was paid by the word.
>Chapter 1: I am born

seems like Veeky Forums has a lot of /r9k/ posters in general

Literally what is /r9k/ about the op apart from the angry pepe.

just give it up, you got btfo the last time you made this thread

You must recall that most of these fields you're talking about thrive on NOT being concise and drawing out some frilly bullshit only a handful of people care to read.

Yes but that point you just made is somewhat sophomoric. There's only so much you can build upon when it comes to thoughts, and some timeless ideas remain.

For instance, I find The Republic more insightful and meaningful than most texts produced today, because of the meaning it has, and the message. Walden has a message that is timeless and contemplative, and I find that most contemporary philosophers lose an element of God that isn't found in contemporary philosophy but is in the Greek schools all the way up to Transcendentalism. And that matters a lot, because it loses practicability in my opinion. Existentialism in the vein of Nietzsche who takes far too objective a stance on religion and whose sophistic ramblings can be the definition of meaningless at times, pales in comparison to existentialism in the vein of Kierkegaard.

>STEMfag can't handle prose and people not being straightforward.
Get yourself tested for autism OP.

>I read Plato and he spent 80 pages wondering whether names are just labels or whether they properly describe (or match) the nature of what they name... I'm not even fucking joking. Yet people will defend this.

really makes me think

but yeah OP I feel where you're coming from desu. I never say this to anyone but I really feel like fiction is the most pleb shit imaginable. I mean its cool you can read it but ffs it's all shit lmao

Hemingway at least keeps it short.

1. get off the internet and preferably all computer usage for at least two weeks

2. exercise and eat right

3. practice mindfulness

4. try to read the book again

Not the guy you're replying to, but dude, what you wrote was borderline word salad. And the parts that actually made sense were vapid.

All the words you used were real words, and I'm sure you had something you were trying to get across in your head, but you didn't make it clear at all.

>There's only so much you can build upon when it comes to thoughts
>I find The Republic more insightful and meaningful than most texts produced today, because of the meaning it has
>I find that most contemporary philosophers lose an element of God
>And that matters a lot, because it loses practicability

Normally I wouldn't be this much of a dick, but if you're going to quote a sensible post and call it "sophomoric," you should be able to express yourself better.

Oh fuck, I left off the best part of this quote
>I find that most contemporary philosophers lose an element of God that isn't found in contemporary philosophy
I mean, Christ -- that's doesn't even rise to the level of a tautology, although it's close. I'm not sure WHAT that is.

what does any of this have to do with your ability to read?

Let us focus on that third billet you outlined, because I believe that will be the source of most of our problems. Marx disagreed fundamentally with the concept of God, which influenced a lot of thought in philosophy. Many philosophers, unlike Kant or Aquinas or Kierkegaard, disagree with the concept of an ultimate creator. How is this not true?

This fact is what I was aiming for ultimately. A spiritual truth is self-evident and is lost on a lot of 'post-Marxian' thought.

Basically the rest of the post was a rebuttal at the 'newer written things could not have been formulated at earlier times' theory.

>I read Plato and he spent 80 pages wondering whether names are just labels or whether they properly describe (or match) the nature of what they name
>Yet people will defend this.

>My feeble mind cannot grasp how significant it was when man first questioned the the very words he spake
>Yet everyone else is the idiot

--------------------
>My engineering degree was
Oh, this is a troll. 5/10 I got to Plato before my autism was triggered and had to start replying immediately.

>If you're going to mistake pretentious vocabulary for "srs bznz philosophy" you can fuck off to the shitpile.

>A spiritual truth is self-evident and is lost on a lot of 'post-Marxian' thought.
it's not self-evident to me

Well that's unfortunate but not entirely my point. I'm sorry you don't believe in God, but for someone who does, you have to understand the points I've made are valid.

This IS a digression, however, and has little to do with the OP.

well it is. you are disregarding a ton of philosophy because it doesn't stick to a premise you hold to be true without reason