/lit/ - Literature

>>14621184

The problem with america is that we love us some pop scientists who we can put on tv shows and pronounce with absolute certainty on things.

Like black science man, what has he ever done to warrant such fame?
Did he invent something?
Discover something?
What?
He is famous because he is black science man

>>7933027
Pretty wide group of people there.

>>6467896

Life isn't about "being happy." We will never get to some utopic, nowhere land where nothing/progress matters anymore. Drug addicts are not getting high to "be happy," corrupt Wallstreet brokers are not embezzling money to "be happy," and I am certainly not in college to "be happy." Happy is an emotion on an entire spectrum where no objective weight is assigned to any particular one. There is differing kinds of "happiness," and it is not defined by any specific combination of neural impulses as well as being different in every individual.

tl;dr English and Neuroscience double major, this thread is dumb

>>5053494

Is there a definable difference between the ability to understand things and the ability to simply regurgitate information? Is there a difference?

For instance I find it easy to appropriate critical theory into my assessment of a text, but I'm curious as to whether I've actually absorbed, understood and applied that knowledge with my own critical capacity, or if I've simply adopted it for a function.

A clearer example: People who read atheist literature and frequently use phrases and rebuttals they have read without considering the possibility of fault within them. "Why don't you believe in Zuess?" etc.
(By the way, atheist myself, but I struggle with these people's inability to empathise)

Anyway, that's besides the point. Does anyone catch the drift of what I'm trying to say?