Veeky Forums's smartest

I am more often on Veeky Forums and Veeky Forums. I am sure Veeky Forums has some bright individuals but my hypothesis is that they have serious tunnel vision.

At least Veeky Forums has a broad focus as it isn't limited to one scientific field. Maybe you have different perspectives at Veeky Forums but when those perspectives are, for example, egoism and Marxism, well...

...

>STEMfag shitter cannot grasp anything but Rand
Who would have guessed.

I browse Veeky Forums more often, so it's smarter.
~or~
Who ever is not on Veeky Forums is smarter.

Couldn't decide which to post so here's both.

this desu

Veeky Forums attracts too much underage troll shit or lunatic science deniers

How can science be real if our eyes aren't real?

>>STEMfag shitter cannot grasp anything but Rand
>Who would have guessed.
Way to go with the assumptions, I have more of a humanities background and dislike scientism and dislike shitting on psychology.
But my experience with both Veeky Forums and Veeky Forums have been much better.

In before you turn it around and ridicule me for having more of a background in the humanities.

Psychology is more STEM than homo.

It's the fact you believe Stirner and Marx do not provide valuable perspectives, which is blatant faggotry. Not to mention the fact that you think Veeky Forums cares about Marx more than, say, anyone else.

/diy/

I'd go with Veeky Forums

Sure, lots of people are scared of math and would never learn what a Fourier transform is.
But does knowing this stuff make you "smart". The capability to learn it shouldn't be overvalued. If someone has read a lot of books and got many perspectives, well reflected opinions on politics and the capability to see things from someone else perspective ... I'd want to count that as smart, and Veeky Forums will have more of those types. (t. PhD in physics)

>It's the fact you believe Stirner and Marx do not provide valuable perspectives, which is blatant faggotry.
That is a fair and good argument. I will reconsider what I wrote.

It seems I do have a bit STEM in me anyway since I do unironically believe things should be testable in some way.
>Not to mention the fact that you think Veeky Forums cares about Marx more than, say, anyone else.
It is more a thing of what first comes up and the stereotype that developed from browsing Veeky Forums.

I hope you did not lump me into the right political sphere for mentioning Marx and Stirner, if it was Rand that was commonly and positively discussed on Veeky Forums I would have picked that.

This makes me wonder how much effect /pol/ and to a lesser extent /r9k/ have on what is discussed on Veeky Forums. I can imagine that Veeky Forums does not want to associate with both and becomes more into people such as Stirner and Zizek as a result and others become a kind of taboo as they are associated with those two controversial boards.

people from Veeky Forums are scared of science.
people from Veeky Forums aren't scared of literature.

I'd say Veeky Forums has a better way with words. That does not make them smarter.

It's more complicated than that. The Randhate is because she is legitimately deemed illegitimate by practically all philosophers out there; she has major flaws in her literature, too, throwing that out of the mix. But boards like /pol/ and sites like Reddit do effect things, because every board has to be contrarian.

This links in to Zizek and Stirner; both as contrarian as it's humanly possible to get, both Unique ;^), and Stirner is obscure as fuck.
A COMMODIUS VICUS

Veeky Forums is not scared of science, although it does have a massive chip on its shoulder when it comes to the STEMfag hatred.

This.

>The smartest people on Veeky Forums are smarter than the smartest people on Veeky Forums
Why do you say that?
>but on average Veeky Forums is probably smarter.
This is probably true, but only because it's more popular.

Veeky Forums is smarter because Veeky Forums doesn't have engineers to drag the IQ average down.

>The Randhate is because she is legitimately deemed illegitimate by practically all philosophers out there
This requires more discussion but I want to focus on the book of linguistics I am reading and this is keeping me from reading it.

Then read it. Or don't. Which do you want to do?

If it helps your decision, it's late here, and I'm about to go to bed.

>A COMMODIUS VICUS

most lit fags are only interested in scientific topics superficially

All I want to mention is that from browsing subreddits on linguistics, anthropology and reading psychology is that:
- Psychologists have legitimate reasons to not take psychoanalysis serious
- Linguistics do not think highly of Wittgenstein do not know enough to say it is legitimate
- Can't remember what anthropologists got upset about, all I know is that most humanities think memetics is bunk and it seems legitimate

The psychoanalysis is most important since it affects our dear Slovak Zizek: how is that different from philosophers dismissing Ayn Rand?

Shouldn't we dismiss Zizek just like Ayn Rand since there are legitimate reasons for it.

To put it another way: can Ayn Rand not provide valuable perspectives even when philosophers don't so?

If you think this is not a fair argument let me know. If you went to bed, sleep well.

underrated

Veeky Forums because here we have engineers