Why is it that people don't read anymore?

>and
Now who's the moron, moron?

>case and point
>and
Case in point

There's was no Internet or tv in the 1700s

Teens still loved reading, regardless. It wasn't boring to them. It was a very exciting medium

Can't handle all these yous

The old folk's reaction was pretty much the same as posted by OP.
Every generation has it. I remember my grandpa saying how the feeling of frustration caused by seeing how there was no "real" connection with people because of smartphones seemed trivial to him because he felt the same about newspaper back in the day.

We do it out of love for you, user.

You should have pointed out how you got 3 replies to a typo and a troll to an "argument".

The balls on this guy.

I go to my library almost daily and the amount of kids and young adults there reading is outstanding. Warms me heart

Wow that's definitely the exception to what's going on around this country.

I'm addicted to stimulus. Trying to nip that in the bud

whenever i go to the library all i see are homeless people

Recreational reading correlates highly with academic success:

>ala.org/aasl/sites/ala.org.aasl/files/content/aaslpubsandjournals/slr/vol3/SLMR_IndependentReading_V3.pdf

Reading literary fiction in particular also improves empathy.

Pic related

>YA
>reading

wait, so if i read 2 hours a day in a chosen field would that make me an international expert in 3.5 years, and 3 hours a day an international expert in 2.3 years?

I mostly just wanted to point out the statistics on buying and reading books. But if you bought a subscription to jstor and read 1000 scholarly articles in your field, you would probably be pretty knowledgeable, don't you think?

Yes, society is in decline. We are growing dumber on average, while bright minds have more tools to gain information, dull minds have all the necessary means to never have to think.

I suppose a mentally retarded population is better for the smart people though, retards are easier to exploit.

>I suppose a mentally retarded population is better for the smart people though, retards are easier to exploit.

Who is going to do my root canal or fix the fuel injection system on my Porsche? It would obviously be better if everyone was >100 IQ We need smart people to do complex tasks. Pretty much everyone complains about the dearth of skilled doctors, surgeons etc etc.

The smart people are going to do it. While I do believe we're either living in or transitioning to an idiocracy, I believe there will still be bright people present.

Stupid people breed faster and make more noise. The readers are hard to spot.

>YA and Comics
>Reading
Pick one

Reading doesn't make you smart. Reading has been surpassed in terms of effort/enjoyment ratio. Only literal fedoras read to look smart and claim anyone that doesnt is dumber.

>why yes of course, people that don't read are dumber by default.

>We are growing dumber on average
patently false
what's with people and their need to spew nonsense

also OP people read much more than they have at any point in history

Hey look, you put a statement of fact next to an edgy retard, I guess that means the fact is wrong.

Really? How do you explain the massive voter base of Trump and Bernie Sanders? One is a retard, the other is reviving socialism.

I suppose you don't believe smartphones have destroyed the memory of a generation, right?

>Really? How do you explain the massive voter base of Trump and Bernie Sanders

There have been far far far far worse examples of what you're trying to do in the past you're seeming to romanticize.

Uh, ever heard of the Flynn Effect, shitlords?

kek you unironically support Sanders and claim he is smart simply for being a socialist and trash Trump as stupid for.. No reason in particular

Delete this shitty thread

>fact

See pic related on op

He didn't say any of that though.....

>But if you bought a subscription to jstor and read 1000 scholarly articles in your field, you would probably be pretty knowledgeable, don't you think?

No, in fact this is why STEMlords shit on humanities retards so hard, because of this belief. Just reading a bunch does not make a person knowledgeable, anybody can memorize random crap via rote. It's actually having the cognitive capability to apply that knowledge that makes the ability to obtain greater knowledge possible, it's why STEM pros have obvious skills and produce concrete results, while being a literature "expert" just means you're some faggot with an opinion. Such an "expert" much write a book which is about as productive as such expertise can be, but even that is hampered by relativity.

If you begin the practice of disregarding the "education" of humanities bullshitters and only listening to people who have proven their knowledge by producing an obviously complex product that unquestionably requires high intelligence/knowledge, you will find yourself reading much smarter authors. Just sayin'.

>much write a book
*might write a book

Huh? Socialism is the worst cancer. I am a constitutional conservative.

>I am a constitutional conservative.

>reads whiney books from each decade

>literally nothing has changed

>people just whine about "the world isn't the way I want it" and people buy their bullshit because of purple prose

>STEMfag claiming STEM requires more than harsh memorization to succeed
>Bashing fields like philosophy, which require critical thinking and analyzing existing concepts

WEW

shout out free uni sub to jstor
did u just suggest reading a fuck ton of relevant information wouldn't make you more knowledgeable lmao

How does STEM actually increase knowledge? Other than pure science or math, all you guys do is design more durable bicycle tires or more efficient outboard motors. Useful, productive, to be sure, but not really important to the wider human experience. 99% of pure science and math is also completely uninteresting to people outside specialist fields. Just because you're ignorant of the complexities of literature, philosophy, history etc etc, doesn't mean it's worthless. I hate to use the "A" word, but you people really do sound like autists. Sort of a provincial mindset common among lower middle class people and Asians.

>while being a literature "expert" just means you're some faggot with an opinion. Such an "expert" much [sic] write a book which is about as productive as such expertise can be, but even that is hampered by relativity.

>It's a STEMfag thinks art is all relative episode!

Why are you even here m8? Go back to Veeky Forums

>I have never had to solve problems with maths, programming, etc

says more about you than me t.b.h.

practical STEM applications are very much about problem solving and philosophy of design is very much about critical thinking and part of STEM

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_design

there's zero point to STEM without a critical approach to design, which ultimately deals with the philosophy behind human experience. it's just the practical side of human experience, things that are actually relevant to a person's day to day life, versus the humanities version which is a bunch of old dudes verbally shitposting about obscure analytic memes which doesn't really matter to anyone outside of academia

>versus the humanities version which is a bunch of old dudes verbally shitposting about obscure analytic memes which doesn't really matter to anyone outside of academia

Why does it have to matter to anyone? This says enough. Most people not in academia should not have a practical grasp of all subjects, if they do it's far too simple to be a field. People are just as likely to have a marine biologists understanding of shark anatomy, ie moot point.

I see you watch anime / read manga, I'll assume that means you are a bernie or trump supporter.

I'm an anarchist actually.

>Why does it have to matter to anyone?

It doesn't, but in that case you should admit that it's just masturbation. STEM isn't masturbation, it's useful both to who applies and potentially other people. Being able to program my own bot is more useful to me and potentially other humans than understanding obscure Taoist dogma in the 18th century.

Nothing wrong with jerking off, just call it what it is.

>STEM isn't masturbation

To who? Where? In what regard? There's plenty mental masturbatory about it. This is transparent.

Producing useful things for other people to experience doesn't seem like masturbation to me. Have you every done so with sick knowledge of philosophy alone?

STEM isn't about production.

nice one liner, I guess it must be true because you said so

PFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFT

Sorry Jeb Bush didn't get the nomination Mr. Constitutional Conservative

good point, and the stupid people are way too sure while the intelligent are often not sure enough

The humanities are useful enough to people that they buy thousands of non fiction books every year. Laymen are interested in these fields and are willing to buy books by experts. And guess what, these experts had to get a phd from a good school and read articles, and books, and write papers and pass exams, and defend their dissertations. It's been a long time since intellectuals without degrees have held professorships at universities. At the end of the day people are willing to pay for these degrees and pay for the more accessible products of these scholars, and it's their money and they can do what they want with it. Maybe I'm biased since I come from an affluent family, but the banks wouldn't lend art students money if it wasn't profitable.

I don't really see what is exciting or interesting about calculating the eccentricity of Pluto's orbit or whatever, but that doesn't mean I dismiss it as "masturbation." That's because I'm not an arrogant cunt. But maybe you're not an arrogant cunt, maybe you're just confused. I think you have a narrow view of usefulness, in your mind something is only useful if it a) is profitable, or b) solves, an immediate, physical problem, like a water pump or a power generator. It's both, pretty much, since if you design a useful thing and nobody wants to buy it, it's never leaving the lab and it's not going to help all those people you seem to care so much about.

In my view, if something is valuable or desirable to me, then it's useful. I'll pay money for it, and the person who produced it will keep working. Anders Zorn's paintings don't solve anything practical at all, but I would sure like to buy a nice hardback retrospective of his work. I'd argue that philosophical ideas have practical utility as well, considering that the entire Late Modern Period from the Bastille to the end of the Cold War has been jerked around by philosophical ideas like a kitten with ball of yarn.

>tl;dr: why must value depend on profitability?

>are we in decline

Entropy is the only universal constant user. Of course we're in decline.

I'm reading your Veeky Forums right now, friendo.

Great post, pal

Yes???? Because there was no internet or tv in the 1700s, the fuck are you on about?
People read because it was the medium where one could experience exciting stories and whatnot, which is why pulp-novels were so big.
The medium changed, that is all.

the decline is more reflected by the fact that some people who actually read are still idiots anyway.

The fuck you care if people read? If you like reading then read, leave others alone

And people support Hillary who is an outright criminal and a serial liar. What is your point?

All the candidates are awful this time.

There's nothing wrong with Bernie Sanders

I agree, but Hillary is a candidate I could expect, Bernie and Trump are not.

Go move to Venezuela, socialist scum.

You really think Bernie is a communist lmfao. Go read blood meridian you fucking country blumpkin

>I'm okay with the status quo because I don't know how politics work, and will vote for whatever candidate my party selects for me.

Hate all presidential candidates. Hate Trump.

He isn't, he is a step in that direction. All communists and communist sympathizers should be round up and shot, Stalin style.

Nice assumptions

>he isn't he's a step in that direction

Hahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahaha

Good argument, jobless + worthless degree holding bum. Whatever, your candidate is out, go fuck yourself.

> All communists and communist sympathizers should be round up and shot
you must be a HUGE Mussolini fan

>my candidate
hee hee hoo

No, Mussolini was an awful leader and fascism is a weak form of government.

Calling everybody that wont drink the commie koolaid a fascist is a great strategy though, keep it up!

>socialist scum
>you really think Bernie is a communist
>country blumpkin

If country blumpkins are the only ones who can discern socialism from communism, maybe I want to be a country blumpkin.

If you aren't read enough to be an anarchist, you aren't read enough to be here.

Let me know when you have something to say

What was the point of those quotes, they're totally post structuralist

How much do you need to read to become an anarchist? I'd assume it is 0 books, since Anarchism is a fairy tale for bitter retards.

Ok I'll let you know when I have something to say.

Literally, you are arguing for fascism

check yourself shitlord faggot. our realities are made entirely out of language, nigger cockboi.

I wont hold my breath, I know you have nothing to say.

Hahahaha

A lot actually. It's a bit too deep for the alt-right though. Which requires, I think around zero books read and lack of a high school diploma.

Well, technically, an anarchistic state that doesnt degenerate into a bunch of delinquents would require smart, competent individuals, so at least 7 books

The alt right lunatic collapsing in on itself.

The alt right are disgraceful, keep making assumptions though.

Really? Anarchism isn't a ridiculous fairy tale? How in the world do you plan to realistically maintain order in low IQ communities?

I'd imagine anarchism has the same requirement as communism / socialism: A home in university, and zero experience in the real world

Thats not me. This is me
I agree! So I assume you'd kill every low IQ person? Sounds interesting.

>Really? Anarchism isn't a ridiculous fairy tale? How in the world do you plan to realistically maintain order in low IQ communities?

when did you start posting here. What have you even read on the matter.

That's my point.

Nope. Nobody with "a low IQ", has to die. It is absence of state.

Hey, man, I'm a part of history. I'm poor and climb trees all day despite being white. I'm a fucking legend.

>so Id assume youd kill every low IQ person? Sounds interest.

No, just the ones that apply """implies""" from my words.

You cant have a bunch of dummies not being smart, whos gonna make the food

I havent been posting here long, though I have read up on anarchism on both sides. I find left, communist style anarchism is garbage, and I find the right, Anarcho capitalism style of anarchism to be garbage. How do you deal with stupid people in either of these systems?

The Alt Right lunatic collapsing in on itself