Is reading fiction a waste of time?

Is reading fiction a waste of time?

Are you some sort of utilitarian faggot?

Wouldnt you like to be driving force in the progression of the human race? Or are you more interested in living in a meme fairy-tale land?

My roommate back in the day read only nonfiction

Had the most technical knowledge of anyone i'd really seen but never got anywhere because he was the single most boring person in existence and basically could not approach any problem from a creative/intuitive angle

Why should anyone care about the future of society when none of us will live long enough to see the changes we may instigate?

Stop posting

Ideas are more inspiring than observations.

the second option sound fine

Nice rebuttal, dorknado

That is a hard question.
>Is reading fiction a waste of time?
yes and no.ijts hard to say what is a waste of time since life has no meaning beyond the beyond we give it. We could be reading "educational books" for personal enrichment but a good work of fiction always explores some of the same elements and in both cases the chances of it being applicable in real life is very slim. I would say the answer to "Is reading fiction a waste of time?" is "it does not matter"

He is kind of right. seeing what has happened to the family unite and general state of the world where people can say "I failed my classes because I was triggered by the fact that all the books are by dead old white men" and not be reprimanded for their idiocy.I think many would reconsider their contributions and while we can always have hope for the future, its also important to have something in the now. We live in a world were having kids to leave the classical legacy is seen as bad and you are told to adopt other peoples kids so romantic notions of proxy immortality are dying

Depends on the fiction. Reading a dime store romance novel with a cover of six-pack abs and a title like "Six-Pack McAdams" probably is a waste of time.

But there's always the theory that everything is useful. Reading that junk romance novel could teach you about how low some people's standards are for stories and teach you how you should *not* tell a story.

Reading fiction can expose you to new ideas and new perspectives on life. It can explore possibilities of the future or past or present and illustrate facets of the human condition. These are things that let you grow as a person by letting you reach beyond what you know and what you can experience yourself. If you consider that a waste of time then you're probably not human. Not in the way that matters.

STEMfags aren't people, user.

No, because I like it.

I'm also always right, so you can't disagree with me.

Of course avid readers of fiction are never boring, as exemplified by this board.

Do you consider watching television series or movies a waste of time? It's essentially the same concept -- we do both of them for fun, or to pass the time. However, while reading a good work of fiction, we learn more about ourselves or the ideas the authors employ throughout their books.

No, but if you are properly educated you should have already finished reading most of the fiction worth reading by the time you're an adult, which is when you should be reading mostly nonfiction. You're an absolute plebian if you're still getting through Shakespeare or Joyce when you're 24 and thus can't find time for Kant.

At what age had you finished reading most of the fiction worth reading?

What an awful education you've had. Kant comes way before Joyce and most of Shakespeare. King Lear, among a few other plays, is best appreciated by the middle-aged and elderly.

Your "proper" education is all wrong. The study of philosophy is primarily a youthful activity, unless you're a professor of it. Fiction, of which there is a near-endless amount worth reading and rereading, should be read at all ages.

Plebs like you shouldn't be giving others advice.

I don't understand how this can even be a serious question.

>That is a hard question.
No, it's not.

Wrong. You're a pleb if you have conversations like these.

t. autistic brainlet

>if you're still getting through Shakespeare or Joyce when you're 24
Phew. One more year left.

Aren't you fed fictions every single day? At what point does emotional influence by environmental sources become detrimental or positive? Does reading make one lesser if the choice could be deeper emotional understanding, or could it make it harder?

There is no material way to achieve the ideal state you want the ideal person to be. To fight against things that "aren't true" in order secure and support those that are true, you would need to keep in constant vigilance against emotional responses to those that aren't; and that's near impossible. You would need emotional needs to justify such a solution. And I'm fairly sure poorly thought out fiction was what brought you in such a position to be naive as to think you aren't immune from its influences socially.

No, a lot of philosophy is written as fiction.

I think I'm going to just start calling posters like you Breitbart

>"getting through" Shakespeare
Wew

That's all I read almost

life is a waste of time

everything is a fucking waste of time

I'm a STEMfag (pure math) but fuck that guy is the exact example of what a scientist shouldn't be

>implying Veeky Forums reads