/lit/ - Literature

>>22091101
It’s shit for 95 IQ blue hairs to pretend they understand history. Part of larger problem with people thinking they can meaningfully learn history through infotainment.

>>21707588
Damn sorry to hear that Anon. I hope you can become a better man than your father. It’s very difficult to learn how to be a man without good fatherly guidance.

>>21223498
It was never sustainable in the first place for two reasons:
1. It placed misguided faith in the masses' abilities to think for themselves and not get swept away by rhetoricians with ulterior motive. Which is very ironic considering this is one of the main reasons the thought-leaders of this movement abhorred religion. What they failed to realize was that religion was never the illness, it was an attempt to work with what appears to be a natural law (people's innate need to conform). Perhaps the idea all along was to start a new religion (atheism), but the problem is if your religion is dishonest and does not present itself as a religion the people will conform to the idea that it is not a religion and that they must think for themselves. This creates an unstable paradox in which the followers, if they are to follow, must not consider themselves followers. It's a recipe for cognitive dissonance and madness.
2. All they did was replace a lively symbol for life/creation (God) with a dead one (big bang, science, whatever etc.)
They didn't actually change anything. Religion aside, the whole "God" debate is pointless since all you're doing is replacing a symbol with another symbol to represent the same thing. Worst of all the symbol you wish to replace it with is far less fitting since it's an attempt to represent life with clinical sterility. It's just dumb.