/lit/ - Literature

why are you talking to college age stem chads? they are idiots.

fpbp, don't kys, and /thread

>>12227030
why do these people bother you so much? They don’t matter. Ignore them.

Science isn’t even an objective field. Experimental results are interpreted according to an agreed- upon paradigm. The only reason contemporary physics is considered more reliable than astrology, alchemy, or philosophy is because most physicists agree to interpret experimental data using said paradigm.

They’re all fucking pseuds, man.

>>12227030
99.9% of "art" today is made for literal toddlers and Chinese people
This is the truth anon

are you hating on the avengers you smelly old goat? you pompous knave? you trollop of the wire?

>>12227050
only a true brainlet would hate what he cant understand

see i dont understand kierkegaard but i like him

>>12227030
Or even better. "Only le libcucks get in humanities lmao, muh pseudoscience, facts and logic" (continues not having a single original thought)

>>12227069
Based. The anti-scientism revolution is gaining momentum on this site. Sadly part of it is Torah-LARPers pretending that science has destroyed the world and we need to revert ourselves to serving a corrupt Church, but aside from them, progress is being made.

>>12227080
>believing in science and progress in the year two thousand and eighteen of our lord and savior jesus christ of nazareth

>>12227080
That is because of various reasons. Just look at the state of it. Pic related. I know it's not meant to be taken in any bad or serious way, but there are far too many faglords who actually care about this and would genuinely say mathematics is superior to sociology (don't mind that they are different fields of study in every way, with no comparison point, and that both are absolutely necessary)

>>12227132
>sociology is necessary

>>12227030
Tell them that their science is soon to destroy civilisation

>>12227136
Why is it unnecessary?

This is kind of unrelated, but why do people always assume scientific expertise and artistic aptitude are mutually exclusive? It's like people really believe the whole right brained, left brained pseudoscience.

>>12227150
that's not the right question

>>12227063
What makes you think I don’t understand physics or that I hate it? All I said was that people who think it’s more objective or accurate than other subjects are pseuds.
Other subjects are objective and accurate enough.

>>12227132
Well is less applied considered more pure?

>>12227202
fields to the left are built on top of fields to the right

>>12227136
I know it's a horrifying use for it, but advertisement is pretty much that.

>>12227033
>fpbp, don't kys, and /thread
based

>>12227212
So?

>>12227229
people who study math and physics are insecure and want to find ways to evelate themselves at the expense of others

>>12227030
>posts his bitchy humanities fag shit on a device that only exists because of centuries of scientific research and discovery

STEM is better, get over it. Humanities and literature are fine as hobbies, but stop pretending that they are even close to having the same value as science.

>>12227030
>this but unironically

>>12227150
Because it is a field dominated by cucks and cultural Marxists

>>12227255
Humanities and literature have a monopoly over value

>>12227255
lol stop pretending science will figure anything out and that it is any good for anything other than giving some comfort. as of now science does not know its place and if science ever does become self aware it will kill itself. art is all humanity ia good for.

>>12227294
art has been finished for centuries

>>12227297
art will never finish. art is the only thing that speaks for us.

>>12227030
so this is the power of the strawman

>>12227030
In my experience Computer Science Majors tend to be socially inept with slightly above average intelligence, doomed to inevitably work some boring dead end job. Don’t pay them any mind.

>>12227304
that's your own blindness that you can only see things from the point of view of a dead practice

>>12227304
It looks to us like art will never finish because there’s currently no dominant artistic paradigm.

Look at the Italian Renaissance in contrast- they thought of art as “finished” because, to them, art was “the imitation of nature” and they had pretty perfected the skill of recreating the human body in marble.

>>12227311
>revels in the pleasure of the flesh
>Struggles to distinguish between sex and gender
>Aware of ethnographic biases
>Thinks gender gap is STEM is acceptable
This picture smells of libtard

CS is fucking cool though

>>12227294
>art is all humanity ia good for.
The most popular thing right now in art are fucking superheroes, aka the single most retarded fantasy imaginable by man. We have multi-billion revenue movies about the fucking Transformers, lmao. Art has completely failed, there's no elevation, nothing.

>>12227030
so american it hurts

>>12227345
that isn't art that is entertainment. I can't believe retards like this browse my literature board yiu can't even tell what art is.
anyway blame capitalism and the cult of scientific materialism for why everything is flooded with entertainment now. there will always be artists and poets out there though.

>>12227334
This, it seemed based until I saw
>revels in the pleasure of the flesh

>>12227368
How do I refute scientific materialism? I have STEM major friends who restate it every time.

>>12227337
It's literally the most boring science imaginable. The people who do CS mostly do it "to code", which is the bricklaying of the 21 century and mind numbingly stupid.

>>12227334
Enlightened people tend to be liberal. Who’d have thought?
>>12227383
Is there a better pleasure I don’t know about?

>>12227334
the point of vigin/chad memes is to put the retarded option on the chad side and then write a nice story around it

>>12227393
Pleasure of the spirit.

>>12227368
the art world is money laundering and """""self"""""-expression today, it's empty

>>12227368
This is just semantics, you're just calling entertainment what is the hollowed husk of art.

>>12227368
>there will always be artists and poets
Their audiences will soon disappear and these artists might as well not exist. If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

>>12227384
take the process philosophy pill.

>>12227393
>Is there a better pleasure I don’t know about?
The pleasure of struggling.

>>12227400

>>12227401

In 10 years, most music, paintings, poems, and scripts will be created by machine learning algorithms.

This kills the /lit/tle fag\

https://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/design/aimade-portrait-sells-for-au611676-at-auction/news-story/23e141d49e3e1fc235463df662135895

>>12227406

This post hurt my feelings.

>>12227233
Everybody does that.
It is not contained on a specific field or function.

>>12227436
I think they already do to some degree. Have you watched the Red Letter Media episode where they play all the Transformers movies at the same time and things happen at the exact same spot?

Also I'm sure they use algorithms for toddlers' cartoons, they look like a fever dream but something is always happening just in time to catch their attention and keep them stuck on the screen

We will still have people randomly shitting on canvases though!

>>12227255
Science literally used to be a hobby.

>>12227165
Why do people assume you must dedicate yourself either to the mind or to the body? Why do people believe you either live in the internal or the external word? Why do people believe you can be of a boisterous or contemplative nature, with no middle way between both? Why do people believe the rational and the spiritual are irreconcilable? Why do people assume others are primarily good or bad, instead of something else, like an amalgamation of contradictions, beliefs and experiences? Why are people dogmatic? Why brittleness settles in early adulthood and constantly aggravates until death? Why new ideas and ways of living disturb us on a deep level? Why do so many grab unto a baseless meaning as a way of ignoring meaninglessness?

Because complexity is scary, anon. Also, artificial divisions are a good way of occluding ones own incompetence.

>>12227384
Just ask them some questions
>Is light a wave or a particle?
>Can you describe or plot the position and speed of an electron in any given moment?
>Ask them to think of a simple mathematical proof. Then ask them how they know it to be true. Then ask them to consider how they can prove the proof to be true. Then ask them to consider how they can prove that all of the proofs of the proofs are true without arguing in a circular, regressive or axiomatic way.
>At this point you may wish to ask whether maths/science could be used by humans without language.
>Science then is inextricably linked to language, the arts and humanities
>Can science produce an answer to the situation in which proofs are provided to others and, while they are understood, are not believed?
>By what means does science emerge as a discipline? And in what ways might it regress, fade away or be undermined in the future? Is this a question that science can answer on its own?

>>12227503
Does anyone of a science-y persuasion have counterarguments to these?

>>12227488
>>12227165
There is physically no time for all this shit at the same time. That's why artists are generally quite dumb.

>>12227266
Good answer

>>12227436
I'm not really sure why should one wipe out the other. And while I think that thing in the article could plausibly pass for an unfinished canvass of Francis Bacon, all the algorithm attempts at poetry or writing in general I've read somehow managed to be even worse than the things in local critique threads.
>>12227401
based cretin who thinks that art world equals conceptualism

>>12227202
I am living a very pure life then

>>12227255
>implying technological advancements for comfort aren't leading us to absolute destruction
STEMfags everyone.

>>12227482
That's because Jews are reptilian made robots.

>>12227030
I won't make fun of someone who pursues the literary life, but most people who do literature deserve to be made fun of.

>>12227080
TAKE THE STEAMY PILL!!! SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY ENGINEERING ART MATH YASSSS

>>12227522
>art world
how is the art world relevant in the current year of our lord outside of money laundering?

>>12227255
>Muh STEM
STEM is an outgrowth of wisdom and most STEM buglords are not wise.

>>12227540
Climate engineering.

Also start a family.

>>12227311
Most people are doomed to work dead end jobs. Give 'em a break.

>>12227585
Effective altruism is most popular among STEM peoples.

>>12227387
You don't even know what CS is about, retard.

>>12227512

I'll take a crack:
>Is light a wave or a particle?
both
>Can you describe or plot the position and speed of an electron in any given moment?
You can use the quantum wavefunction to map probability distributions of where the electron could be.
>Ask them to think of a simple mathematical proof. Then ask them how they know it to be true. Then ask them to consider how they can prove the proof to be true. Then ask them to consider how they can prove that all of the proofs of the proofs are true without arguing in a circular, regressive or axiomatic way.
Doesn't understand math. Math is based on some fundamental axiom and then the rest is built from that assumption. The axiom is usually something obvious like "assume you can add 1 to any real number, and then assume there are such a thing as real numbers and they have these properties." From those two assumptions you could derive the rest of mathematics in almost it's entirety.
>At this point you may wish to ask whether maths/science could be used by humans without language.
Basically a nonsense question but you could theoretically find other ways of communication beyond speaking and the written word and use that. Which does not mean that art would not exist under that different framework, but it would merely be different.
>By what means does science emerge as a discipline? And in what ways might it regress, fade away or be undermined in the future? Is this a question that science can answer on its own?
Science doesn't answer general questions, it observes specific phenomena empirically. Only fools would claim that science can answer every conceivable vague notion, or non-concretely defined problem.

Yet if science can't explain it, neither can the pontification of random dudes who read Plato.

>>12227597
>muh REAL CS

Just go full math, you pathetic brainlet. "Software Engineering" or any of the other meme shit that falls under the CS umbrella is bugmen tier.

>>12227540
What about all the people that science prevents from, y'know, dying?

>>12227503
>>12227512
Science is a methodology to infer pragmatic knowledge from observations and depends upon philosophical assumptions.

>>12227609
Honestly, some people should just die

>>12227132
I studied math in undergrad. I was in an "honors" program so most of my classmates intended on going to graduate school for either math or a related field like stats, physics or comp sci. Oh the fucking posturing, the snobbery. Faglords indeed.

>>12227614

In the same way you depend on your great great grandfather to wipe your own ass.

>>12227605
>Picks one meme job that doesn't even require CS.
>CS is a meme!!!
CS != Programming, you philistine.

>>12227512
Do the trick with the axioms, they will probably have to admit that mathematics is just arbitrary human rules and with that the whole castle crumbles.

There are some counter arguments to that, which base themselves on the ridiculous effectiveness of mathematics in describing reality, but none of them convince me.

>>12227600
>From those two assumptions
Which means mathematics is just some set of seemingly arbitrary rules and some logical conclusions from that. Basing any kind of science in that seems pretty ridiculous.

>The axiom is usually something obvious like "assume you can add 1 to any real number, and then assume there are such a thing as real numbers and they have these properties."
It "usually" isn't. The axioms of math are very well defined, nearly universally accepted and can be written down on a single page.

>>12227623
Not an argument.

>>12227337
Computer Science is just the dumping ground for people who are too stupid for real science or engineering.

>>12227629

And yet the math based on these assumptions created the computer you shitpost on and sent men to the moon.

>>12227636
And language created maths. Your point?

>>12227636
>sent men to the moon.

The cope in this thread is amusing.

>>12227636
Well, to some extent it certainly is useful as a model for reality, but actually deriving any conclusions about the real world is highly dubious.

Building a computer doesn't require "truth" it is mostly just sticking transistors in the right order.

>>12227643
>language created maths
A HIGHLY dubious claim.

>>12227617
I would have died, anon. Science saved me. And now I wouldn't be talking to you on 4chan in my pajamas while eating cheese. Not being dead is pretty nice.

>>12227647
>A HIGHLY dubious claim.
I'm being cheeky because you claimed that maths created his computer, which is equally as dubious, if not more so.

>>12227647
>doesn't require "truth"
>the right order
not sure that adds up anon?

>>12227659
>because you claimed that maths created his computer
Well, I didn't.

>which is equally as dubious
It really depends on what you understand as creating a computer.

>>12227643
In the same way the single celled organism that spawned all of biology on earth is responsible for your father's erectile dysfunction.

>>12227647
If science cannot derive conclusions about the real world, by existing in the real world, and having tangible obvious observable effects in the real world, then by your own fucking arbitrary worldview nothing can.

also
>Building a computer doesn't require "truth" it is mostly just sticking transistors in the right order.
You're just having a laugh at this point. Nobody is actually that stupid.

>>12227659
> maths created his computer, which is equally as dubious, if not more so.
The founder of modern computing is Alan Turing, a mathematician. All of the ideas of computing are based off the foundation of mathematics/physics(also based on math)/electric engineering(based on physics).

>>12227662
"The right order" is a thing for engineers, you probably could build a computer, from the transistors up, with a 4th graders knowledge of mathematical + some logic.

>>12227653
Eh, good for you. But in some cases I think we are prolonging the lives of people just because we view death as something to be avoided at all costs.

>>12227094
I know you're meming, but I personally am a spiritual individual and I believe in Christ among other spiritual figures. I am only against organized Churchianity, which sadly the Torah-agents of this site have either been raised up in or recently came to, are promoting. I love and follow Christ, but am very against Paul and Church, which have both corrupted his teachings.

>>12227668
>then by your own fucking arbitrary worldview nothing can.
Exactly, thus trying to derive truth about reality by any means is retarded, which was the point I was trying to argue.

>You're just having a laugh at this point. Nobody is actually that stupid.
I actually took a computer engineering class in University. Building a basic computer really is as simple as that.

>>12227683
>Exactly, thus trying to derive truth about reality by any means is retarded, which was the point I was trying to argue.

>"Question: When you are looking at something, do you see only light or do you see the object?

>Prof Feynman: The question of whether or not when you see something you see only the light or you see the thing you're looking at is one of those dopey philosophical things that an ordinary person has no difficulty with.

>Even the most profound philosopher, when sitting and eating his dinner, hasn't any difficulty in making out that what he's looking at perhaps might only be the light from the steak, but it still implies the existence of the steak which he is able to lift by the fork to his mouth. The philosophers that weren't able to make that analysis and that idea have fallen by the wayside from hunger."

>>12227523
Underrated kek

>>12227647
>>language created maths
>A HIGHLY dubious claim.
physics creates biology, which creates language, which creates math, which means math is lower than literature

>>12227255
>DUDE MATERIAL COMMODITIES ARE THE FOUNDATION OF CULTURE

>>12227679
>I am only against organized Churchianity
so you are a liberal first and a christian second, and you follow christianity only as long as it fits your liberal worldview

>>12227686
You are missing the point, surely you can get some approximate truth, simply by curve fitting hard enough, but that doesn't matter if you want actual Truth.

>>12227700
You have not defined what absolute truth even means.

>>12227696
paper > literature

>>12227705
A model is true if any input gives the exact right predictions. Currently any attempt at such models has to heavily rely on mathematics, which as demonstrated before is just arbitrary.

>>12227709

“Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.”

― Mark Twain

>>12227676
I'm actually kind of a weird case because I've been suicidal for ages, yet I kept clinging on to modern medicine for a bad chronic illness that was legit killing me in my teens.
I seriously considered stopping at some point because the therapy I was going through cost tens of thousands of euros in taxpayer money and I felt guilty about wasting all those resources while still being suicidal. Yet I kept going, I take my regular meds, I take my brain meds. Until you're committed on death it's hard to let go.

>>12227718
Not an argument.

>>12227709
Suppose we have a world in which the laws of physics are just those specified by the standard model. Thus this possible world has a true model by assumption since the entire time-evolution is described by the model. But now your definition says that no true model can exist, since quantum uncertainty makes exact prediction impossible. Thus we have a contradiction, and your definition cannot work in every possible world. Since I see no reason why the definition of a true model should be restricted just to the actual world, your definition seems to me to be flawed.

>>12227824
>quantum uncertainty makes exact prediction impossible
Absolutely false. It makes exact predictions about certain things impossible, but not predictions in general.

The standard model still makes predictions, but as it doesn't seem to be deterministic it can't make predictions about more then probabilities, which in this case it would make perfectly.

The argument basically doesn't make sense as you are supposing a model, which doesn't predict certain things and then complain that it doesn't predict these exact things.

>>12227384
By first understanding yourself, and then explaining to them, that what they call "material" is merely "perception", and that any object of perception cannot be the source of perception. Then, from here, you read into Advaita or similar doctrines, and eventually arrive at the recognition of yourself as Brahman, the Unit of all Reality. Boom, materialism btfo.

>>12227722
Yes it is.

>>12227861
I assumed that you meant by exact a prediction of the sort that a particle is at some point of space at some point of time, which is impossible as you obviously know.

The point of the argument was that your definition should work in any possible world, and I "constructed" a possible world in which it obviously leads to problems. However, your definition is different so my argument doesn't really matter.

>>12227886
No, it really isn't.
It might be an argument for you giving up this conversation, but not for your point.

>>12227698
Nope, I'm just not interested in serving corrupt institutions who have throughout their entire history only distorted sacred doctrines for their own worldly gain. If you are into that, power to you.

>>12227030
I was a CS Major.

The people you’re referring to dropped out sophomore year and switched to Information Systems (below IT) or business.

And honestly, a literature degree is a waste of time, if you have bills to pay.

>>12227916
yep, that's liberalism

>>12227132
Your pic is outdated.

>>12227132
This is like telling people you program in binary

>>12227165
No one assume they are mutually exclusive, they just assume humanities students are brainlets that failed calculus 1 which is mostly true

>>12227600
>Basically a nonsense question but you could theoretically find other ways of communication beyond speaking and the written word and use that. Which does not mean that art would not exist under that different framework, but it would merely be different.
You seem to lack an understanding of what language is.

>>12227488
It's actually the duality of man

>>12228045
Are you sure?

>>12227132
Saying that sociology is anywhere near as fundamental or necessary as math in any way is outright bologne

>>12228085
Language is not restricted to audible and written cues.

>>12227140
>Shit goes to civilization
>Civilization goes to shit
It was fun while it lasted bois. Just hope it can be better next time

>>12227030
I agree that pure empiricists are braindead and soulless and are god awful at utilizing their shitty web of gestalts properly to be inventive but pure rationalism or whatever the fuck this is is just as ignorant

>>12227266
So you haven't actually read any sociology then.

>>12228093
what about the fundamental advances in sociology we had the last decades? what would we do if we lost them?

>>12227050
>Science isn’t even an objective field. Experimental results are interpreted according to an agreed- upon paradigm. The only reason contemporary physics is considered more reliable than astrology, alchemy, or philosophy is because most physicists agree to interpret experimental data using said paradigm

kys

>>12227050
dear fucking god dude

Yes we all held hands in prayer and silicon wafers magically assembled themselves and our phones just came to life, it’s a Christmas miracle!!!

has science ruined the western civilization?

i am having a good laugh with this thread.

>>12227311
STEM thought process
>I will study stem because it advances society, is financially lucrative and is intellectually fulfilling

Humanities cope process
>english is actually far more difficult then math
>I actually have to think, not just memorize facts
>dude calc 1 is like soooo impossible lol,
>STEM is a sexist boys club anyway
>even google needs english majors
>once my memoir about being a depressed, unemployed college graduate gets published Ill be fine financially
>gender studies is actually a legitimate field
>once the revolution happens, my college debt wont even matter
>I'm not a drone like all you STEMlords

>He got a degree so that he could "properly" interpret other people's artistic works
l m a o

DEAR /lit/
I, A /sci/ FAG HAVE AN ANNOUNCEMENT TO MAKE.
AHEM
FUCK NIGGERS
FUCK JANNIES
FUCK TRANNIES
FUCK JEWS
FUCK LITERATURE
FUCK FICTION
FUCK HUMANITIES
FUCK YOU

THAT IS ALL
*DAB*
>*DAB*
*DAB*
>*DAB*
*DAB*
>*DAB*

>>12228268
>FUCK JANNIES
>FUCK TRANNIES

What's the difference?

>>12227030
Philosophy major here - I only browse /sci/. I replied to one of you autists that made a thread over there wondering if we get pussy. Since you're still projecting, I'll have you know we indeed get pussy and that unlike yourselves, we aren't dirty Bohemians. Don't bother replying: I won't be here to read them. Later, proles.

>>12228233
>I will study stem because it advances society
how
>intellectually fulfilling
spending time working through problems is for bugmen

youtube.com/watch?v=C9SiRNibD14
DECOLONIZE YOUR MIND

>>12227030
It sucks when obnoxious people are rude and correct.

>>12228233
I have learnt great Things from non-stem Fields, that help greatly in stem Fields. Stem is for Money, non-stem is for actual discovery.

>>12227030
I'm going to seem like a tryhard moralfag, but everyone's job matters and the contributions of philosophers, mathematicians, scientists, authors, musicians, all of the people, have made our lives better.
Don't have to worry about other people being better than you. Everyone's important. People who say they're *more* important are wrong, unless they're obviously way more important like doctors or something.

>>12228312
Tedpilled

>>12227030
bitch please, how the fuck do you think I gather knowledge? by reading, you moron. Tolstoy and Dazai I like to read, but that won't keep me from reading Pauli and Dirac.

if nothing is true, will it hurt if you pour boiling water on yourself?
"truth" is repeatable and useful results, you know from experience and observation that pouring boiling water on yourself will hurt, because science is based on repeated reproducable experiments, it is truth.

>>12228312
decolonizing shit is such a fucking gold mine right now.
I wish I was black I would cash in on that shit sooooooo fucking hard
This girl in my class is selling herbal remedies and shit for decolonizing menstruation she's making bank, I could see her little MLM thing getting huge.
SHIT DECOLONIZING IS WHERE ITS AT RIGHT NOW SOMEBODY SELL ME A SET OF ESTABLISHED "BLACK" TWITTER AND INSTA PROFILES SOME BLACK GUY TEAM UP WITH ME WE COULD MAKE IT BIG BOY BIGGGG
fuck me...

>>12228355
That is not truth

>>12227132
Mathematics is just applied divine intellect.

>>12228312
>takes a whole one minute to say "please don't interrupt us and apologise"
holy shit

>>12228376
Based and redpilled. Only correct answer

>>12228273
Jannies are cowardly faggots that just delete anything that goes against their agenda, at least trannies are out and proud.

>>12228389
They should get an obligatory "Janitor" capcode so we can rightly ostracize and ridicule them when they try to use the site as normal users.

God, there legitimately are jannies posting among us, and we can't even tell them apart. What if I'm just a janny having some laughs with this shitpost?

>>12227055
Avengers may be for kids but god damn, Iron Man armor really looks good. Whoever designed it deserves a statue.

>>12227030
It's just the computer """ science """ fags are the ones who try to feel superior to other people, while they are nothing but brainlet monkeys compared to the rest of STEM, I met lots of biology or physics Chads who love literature and excited to talk about it

>>12228408
tfw cs major but still read big brain books

im gonna make bank AND i get to read the same shit you guys do, for free, because i have access to the uni library

checkmate literature majors

>>12228408
this is true.

>>12228376
Based.

>>12227132
>>12227942
ftfy

>>12228457
monk should be at beginning

>>12227030
Important mathematicians and scientists who were theists:
>Riemann (uttered the Lord's Prayer with his dying breath--bless his soul)
>Gödel (read the Bible every Sunday)
>Einstein (Gödel's best friend; "officially" an atheist but turned away secular science towards Kantian metaphysics in his later years)
>Heisenberg (a Platonist)
>Lemaître (convinced Einstein of the cosmic egg creation theory, otherwise known as the Big Bang)
>Planck ("the spirit is the matrix of all matter")
>Neumann (met with a priest shortly before passing--evidently extraordinary mathematical ability was not enough to purge the fear of God from him)
>Maxwell
>Faraday
etc etc thats just from the top of my head

>>12228474
That doesn't explain why your mom is such a whore

>>12227311
>>12227334
>>12227383
>>12227400
The flesh is willing but the spirit is weak.

>>12228465
>monk
please be bait

>he thinks modern universities offer more than a credentialing service
>he doesn't major in the most lucrative possible field while devoting his free time to great literature and philosophy
never gonna make it

>>12227030
why bag on science when business is the real enemy of the human soul if they didn't exist the world would be a much better place filled with both monuments to art and reason

>>12227140
Good. I bloody hope so

>>12227255
>Materialism
>good
I'd fucking sell all my shit to go back to the world without smartphones

All fields involved with abstract thought are the only redeeming feature of humanity. Arts, philosophy and sciences are the only reason we shouldn't all be killed. My personal favourite art and science is probably literature and maths, but I also love music and am getting into visual arts, and I want to get into philosophy.

>>12228408
From my past experience as a math/CS undergrad, the brainlet monkey label certainly fits the vast majority of cs students, but by far, the math students, particularly the ones planning on graduate level math studies, holy shit,
>>12227621
this guy hits the nail on the head.
Currently a CS grad student doing ML stuff. Everyone here is pretty enjoyable to be around and generally not a bunch of pretentious idiots. Generally.

Oh man i fucking love this 5

>>12229278
>the math students
>brainlet monkey
Uh, no, sweaty. That would be
>a CS grad student

>>12228268
based

>>12227255
STEM is just a tool to facilitate participation in the humanities

>>12229167
Nothing is stopping you, pseud.

>>12227484
Humanities literally used to be science.

>>12229391
It's not the same as that technology never existing.

>>12229397
Science literally started as a branch of philosophy

>>12229391
I only use it for school. But world was definitely different (for better) without smartphones

>>12228790
this is the worst take in the thread

>>12228398
Don't you mean they deserve a Stone Man?

>>12228268
based

>>12227030
Literature departments basically just engage in Communist scholasticism nowadays, what's the point? You don't need an instructor to read a novel.

>>12229751
I still believe in liberal arts education. There are a lot of spooks, and it's been set back quite a bit, but it's not at "what's the point?" levels yet.

Comparative literature has always been lefty-focused, fair. But most people on this board won't study comp lit, they'll study either English, political science, classics, history, or philosophy. You might think these fields are spooks, or that it's not worth your money -- your call -- but it is much better to study them in a university environment in which you can work with faculty and other students to get the most out of the material. This is a better way to learn than just "reading novels."

>>12229780
>English
Communist.
>Political Science
Progressive-liberal (Communism with Anglo-American characteristics).
>Classics
Probably okay, will become Communist eventually in all likelihood.
>History
Can be okay, leans Communist.
>Philosophy
Mostly Communist or Communist with Anglo-American characteristics.

Communism is going to set the humanities back centuries. It's like fucking crack for humanities scholars.

>>12229167
There is still a market for traditional cell phones if you want one

>>12227030
CS isn't science or mathematics and belongs on >>>/g/ please get >>>/out/ or get in the >>>/trash/ or better yet go back to >>>/r/eddit thank you
>>12227033
you can't fpbp or /thread your own post

>>12229791
I don't disagree that the leftward shift of the humanities is dangerous. A lot of damage has already been done. But it's not "pointless" to study these subjects, and if you care enough about them you should study them -- things aren't as bad as you think (seriously, these departments are bad but in my years working in them they will put up with almost anything if you're willing to engage)

Things are going in the wrong direction. The American Philological Association, the largest classics academics' group, renamed to the "Society for Classical Studies" over their opposition to the term "American." I have no illusions about the trajectory, but we cannot just cede the space of appearance to the left.

You saying these fields are pointless is what is going to be the dagger that kills all of these subjects in the long term. Again, if you don't think they're worth your money or time, that's entirely fair, but don't write off liberal arts education

>>12229791
>(You)
retard

>>12229818
No, I mean pursuing a degree in them at a university. I think universities are in a bubble - once the funding is cut off we'll see a reduction in this kind of thing. I think it'll be necessary to preserve things outside of the university (ironic reversal of the monasteries preserving classical culture here).

>The American Philological Association, the largest classics academics' group, renamed to the "Society for Classical Studies" over their opposition to the term "American."
kek

>>12229826
Yeah, like I said I think it's fair to choose not to pursue a degree in them at a university. As an individual decision, it might not be worth your time given job prospects and the like unless you're a rich kid who wants to spend a couple years reading books and feeling good about yourself

The modern university is in a bubble but I'm attached to it anyway, and I love the idea of working to improve it by engaging with it. I'm lucky I ended up at a good one, or else I'd probably see it the same way you do.

Right now, the university is the greatest bastion of productive thought in the fields of philosophy, classics, and arguably history. No one else seems willing to pay pseuds to sit around chatting all day, writing shit no one will read. Until monasteries or God forbid the government starts funding those, I'm worried that declining faith in those institutions will lead to a great loss of potential in those fields

math is an abstraction. it does not, and never will, exist either physically or metaphysically.

>>12229841
I just feel like we're on the verge of something on par with the Cultural Revolution or dissolution of the monasteries in England, where we're going to lose or forget a great deal, except the modern monasteries are leading the charge on this one. Don't see any way of avoiding a left singularity at this point, I think we crossed the event horizon in the 60s in that regard.

>>12228187
why are phones always the science fag's go to >BTFO!!!
it was a sidegrade at best. as all consumer technology is

>>12229859
Fair enough. For the West's sake I'll hope you're wrong

>>12228187
You don’t have to know how a machine works in order for it to work.
Yes, science has allowed us to build complex machinery, but we don’t really know how such machines work on a fundamental level. We only think we do because, again, we all agree on the same paradigm.

>>12229799
>computer science
>isn't science
>anon doesnt know difference between CS and CIS
>anon talking out of his ass yet again

>>12229859
I think I you’re right. Another good analogy is the fall of Rome. All their collected knowledge was lost, only to be preserved by a few isolated monasteries and rediscovered on a large scale during the mid to late medieval era.
Let’s jus hope that, once the university system fails and all Western knowledge is lost to the common consciousness, some future Renaissance will look back to what we used to have for inspiration.

>>12229892
I actually hope we DO "lose" much of our philosophy from the past ~200 years or so. It's been quite harmful to us in the aggregate, hasn't it?

>>12227311
Computer Science is just watered down computer engineering and not on the level of an actual science or engineering field.
Computer Engineer/EE best friends club for life.

>>12229900
checked
and yes

>>12227683
Taking courses != understanding the material or learning anything, as you're proving right now.

>>12229931
Marx is here to stay, unfortunately, but imagine a world where Locke, Rawls, etc. are simply consigned to the dustbin of history. Surely this would be a good thing.

>>12229879
>we don’t really know how such machines work on a fundamental level
Your personal ignorance on a subject doesn't apply to humanity as a whole.

>>12229947
it actually does. humanity as a whole doesn’t know. No scientist knows. They just think they know because they were educated within a particular scientific paradigm.

>>12227132
>>12227942
The more I think about math the more it seems like an arbitrary system that only works in so far as it corresponds to physics. There is no abstract, higher mathematical truths, things like Euler's identity aren't deep aesthetic things of beauty. They're obvious consequences of a self prescribed system whose rules are,basically, a kind of grammar. There's no real mathematical truth, only real physical truth.
Imagine if I say "The bottle is blue." That sentence is true insofar as it corresponds to a reality in which the referred bottle is blue. It's true (or correct) in itself insofar as it follows English grammatical conventions, but a sentence that isn't true in itself can't correspond to a reality at all. Saying "Those bottle are blue." Is a grammatical mistake and thus corresponds to no reality at all, even if there is a blue bottle.
Similarity "2+2=4" is true insofar as there are two things of two in reality to be referred to and clearly seen that they're all together 4. "2+2=5" is incorrect in its own mathematical-grammatical rules and thus has no corresponding reality just like "Those bottle is blue."
To merely say “2+2=4” when there are no groups of objects to refer to is “grammatically” / mathematically correct. But it isn’t true in any sense. It’s like saying “The bottle is blue” with no bottle in sight. The sentence is grammatically correct and meaningful, but has no truth-value.
Grammatical, and thus Mathematical, truth have no higher or purer value or privilege. They're all just truth of convention. Their “correctness” depends on the correct use of grammar or math. Their truth-conditions are determined solely by the realities they correspond to.
>t.slightly drunk math and philosophy major soon to change to statistics and philosophy because at least statisticians don't have the ego to pretend they’re doing some higher level buddha shit

>>12227055
>>12228398
Some normies said that this is the Iliad of this era. Is this true?

>>12229943
I don’t think Marx is here to stay. He really hasn’t been around for very long and isn’t taken very seriously as a philosopher. He’ll probably only be remembered by specialized academics two hundred years from now.
But I think you’re right, modern philosophy is more concerned with creating consistent systems then in observing and describing reality. Locke and Rawls create pretty philosophical structures but there’s really nothing inherently interesting about them.

>>12227050
Only SEETHING STEMniggers are mad at this post

>>12229959
no the iliad is not an us vs them capeshit it is about empathy.

>>12229970
No, I mean, I view Locke, Rawls, and basically all Anglo-American thought, to be evil. I'm sort of conflicted about living through a collapse, but Anglo-American culture is so evil that I sort of welcome it. I'm more worried about what else we're going to lose.

We're all gonna die anyway, what dumbass major you or they picked will be irrelevant eventually

>>12229984
>I view Locke, Rawls, and basically all Anglo-American thought, to be evil.
why

>>12229980
>t. read the Iliad once in Epic Poetry 102
but yeah you’re right and you’re probably the only person on /lit/ who understands this

>>12229991
Because it's at the root of everything bad about the modern world along with its cousin, Communism.

>>12230002
>it’s at the root of everything bad
like what

>>12227030
I'm studying computing sciences, these guys are the same faggots who watch Rick and Morty, watches the Marvel movies, they read comics and browse Reddit, these guys are a fraud, don't even listen to them, they won't achieve nothing, I read books when I have free time and when they say I can't relate to any of this is not necessary to get related on a book, the important is to learn something and apply it on your daily life, these guys are the same faggots who will say that computing science is not true science, fuck them, yes it is and it involves a lot of other sciences to make your fucking life more easier.

>>12228465
>>12228524

>>12230076
switch to english with me and be my fren :)

Why is art seen as inherently different from math? They both serve to abstract meaning from the world if we look at it in a general sense. I don't see how posturing about which way to study a subject does anything but limit our understanding.

>>12227050
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEETARD.

All fields of science overlap and cross-validate themselves. Even those that started off as different fields like thermo & physics or physics & chemistry. Or biology & chemistry. Information from experiments aren't agreed upon, they are process. Then that process is validated by further experimentation. You aren't agreeing on something, you are trying to model reality based on what you can detect. Science is the closest we can get to actually understanding reality. The fact that we can use our understanding of how reality works to predict the outcome of events and create technology like drugs and electronics should be enough to show that it is more than just a paradigm.

You're trying to hard to be "deep" but come off as a dumb ass who doesn't understand scientific discovery.

>>12228474
Aren't most mathematicians some type of platonist anyway?

>>12229858

t. retarded /sci/lord

>>12229990

AHAHAHAHAA THE FUCKING 20-YEAR OLD DOOMER DICK SUCKER LIVING IN MOMMY'S BASEMENT LMFAO

GET ANY TENDIES TODAY? THOUGHT SO LOL

FUCK YOU NIGGER YOU'RE EVERYWHERE KYS RIGHT NOW LITTLE BITCH SUCK MY DICK AND FUCK YOUR MOM

>>12227050
>>12229879
>>12229952
You can't be fucking serious.
Well, no, of course you're serious, and probably nobody will ever be able to convince you that we do in fact know pretty much exactly how electronics work.
But I just want you to know that you are the kind of person who's deeply ignorant and proud of it.

>>12229952
>it actually does
It absolutely doesn't. If you bothered to learn something instead of plugging your ears and stamping your feet while yelling about how we can't know anything about anything, you too could understand exactly how circuits work down to a subatomic level.

>>12229954
But you are just ignoring reality here.

> it seems like an arbitrary system that only works in so far as it corresponds to physics
But it corresponds to physics with to COMPLETELY unreasonable amount. Just look at the divergence theorem, which on one hand is a really abstract mathematical claim, which purely results from an extremely basic model of reality.
You can look at the theory of PDEs and see some very weird claims about some types of functions or you can take a look at it and see how pure mathematics relates to what we see in the physical world.
If you are going to tell me that mathematics is an "arbitrary" system, then first explain to me how it so incredibly effective at relating to reality.

>things like Euler's identity aren't deep aesthetic things of beauty.
Probably because it is a rather boring identity.
But if you actually look at the good ones, the ones which seem intuitively clear, but even arise from very simple rules, they are providing an aesthetic.

>>12229940
Then tell me, what beyond arranging transistors do you do to build a computer?

Sure, there is some semi interesting math in reducing circuits and you get infinitely complex the lower you go, but the basic principles aren't all that mathematical, its engineering.

>>12230235
>Why is art seen as inherently different from math?
Because mathematics is about expressing objective truth within a given set of axioms.

Actually read a book on mathematics before positing (you can start with the greeks), thanks.

>>12227942
lol

>>12228154

>go into physics
>spend hours hunched over textbook but feel like I'm actually learning something and potentially could contribute something useful to humanity someday
>go into english lit
>read """classics""" and try to predict which interpretation the professor will think is valid
>more and more diversity authors are being introduced into the curriculum even as white men seem less and less welcome in the field
>the field is shit anyway and no one gives a shit about anything I could ever write. The world would probably be a better place without Ulysses.

The incredible ignorance regarding /sci/ shit in this thread is laughable. When your only defense of humanities relies on basically being a primitivist then you've already lost. Also to that one guy asking whether light is a wave or a particle like thats some big contradiction in science that btfos physics, you're a complete retard and you make all humaniggers look stupid.

>>12230436
Platonists on weekdays and saturday, formalists on sunday.

>>12230580
How about building the transistors in the first place (which rely on quantum mechanics)?

>>12230684
>How about building the transistors in the first place (which rely on quantum mechanics)?
And thus any simple task can be made infinitely complex.

Claim "It isn't hard to build a simple table, you just need to do some woodworking"
Disprove:
>The tools needed need to be crafted by machines who are extremely complex and rely on extremely complex mechanism so building a table requires you to know about everything that has to do with machining, metal working, industrial engineering and also computer engineering and thus Quantum mechanics.
>Gathering wood requires machines, so without a degree in mechanical engineering and knowledge on how to gather this wood you can't build a table.
Thus building a table is infinitely complex.

Honestly, this is just sophistry on your part. Every task is infinitely hard if you go into every single detail of it, but "building a computer" doesn't require you to have any clue about quantum mechanics, your idiotic standards of being able to create something from some arbitrary level requires you to have that knowledge.

>>12230666
Note that according to your char, serious philosophy is one of the few things that attracts similar levels of intelligence as pure math and physics.

>>12230707
>"building a computer" doesn't require you to have any clue about quantum mechanics
Yes, it doesn't now since we can get transistors from the corner store. This however is completely missing the point since anything resembling modern computers is impossible to build without transistors, which were a Nobel-prize worthy breakthrough. You are attempting to get around the no miracles argument by using the current situation in which transistors are well understood instead of the original situation.

Your example of building a simple table is just ridiculously. Gathering wood does not require machines (or is an axe a machine), and the tools need not be crafted by machines which are extremely complex. On the other hand without transistors there are no modern computers.

I like reading books. Computers are neat.

>>12229954
Stop lol
Go outside, talk to someone

>>12230593
>read a book on mathematics before positing

I'd rather be a brazen pseudointellectual, thanks. Subjective truths are more my speed.

>>12228268
basté

>>12227050
That's true, but the current paradigms are pretty good

>>12227050
God dammit. who was the philosopher of science who said a less stupid version of that again?

>>12230972
Kuhn. He has been pretty much discredited. Most philosophers of science that are taken seriously are structural realists which do not suffer from any of the problems Kuhn raised.

>>12227030
To be honest, if you do an arts degree then you are wasting your time. A STEM degree is infinitely more valuable and in this day and age you can very easily educate yourself about any subject that interests you for free. Also a well rounded individual is well versed in science and the arts, acquires social skills and physical fitness.

>>12229954
>retarded freshman goes onto judgmental rant about things he doesn't even comprehend yet
cringe. do switch, brainlet, this is beyond embarrassing.

>>12230752
>On the other hand without transistors there are no modern computers.
But you can build a computer without them. Honestly, just a bit of metal is enough to "build a computer", if you want a "modern computer" you can raise the bar arbitrarily high, just I can raise the complexity of any simple task arbitrarily high.

You are raising bars to retarded standards to try to argue a tangential point to something I never even said.

>>12229382
wew this

>>12227275
Maybe before they decided to be relativists. They destroyed their own hegemony over value.

>>12229480
And now it is the only branch of philosophy left that isn't a joke.

>>12230785
Okay I did that, and nothing has changed