/lit/ - Literature

Forcing him to read isn't going to make him enjoy reading.

Make him play good games instead.

Cave Story, for instance. or play on an emulator with him.

>>2916483
Cave Story is not that good a game

Let your cousin come to reading on his own terms. Let him see you reading books. If you're cool and your life is an excellent one in his eyes, he'll follow. If you're a loser, he'll continue to play vidya.

make him read all of The Cantos by Ezra Pound before he can play

>>2916489
You're wrong. I'm right. End of story.

>The original Cave Story earned widespread critical acclaim. 1UP.com described it as "so massive that it rivals modern [Game Boy Advance] Castlevania and Metroid games in terms of scope and play time".[46] Matt Miller of Game Informer observed that Cave Story combines elements of Metroid, Ninja Gaiden, Mega Man, The Legend of Zelda, and Castlevania into an "engrossing, challenging, and quite lengthy" whole.[2] Inside Mac Games ascribed the game's popularity to its "polished feel, engaging storyline, and compelling artwork".[47] Electronic Gaming Monthly stated that "the burgeoning Western indie game scene owes a tremendous debt to Japanese pioneers like Studio Pixel, whose freeware hit Cave Story proved that with sufficient vision, skill, and passion, a single developer can still craft a deep, compelling action game".[48] Jonathan Holmes of Destructoid called Cave Story an "important game", observing its influence on artistic indie games like Braid, as well as the continued relevance of 2D game design (cf. Capcom's Mega Man 9). He also compares the game design to that of Shigeru Miyamoto in its ability to teach without tutorials, like at the beginning of Super Mario Bros.[1] In July 2006, Cave Story earned 1st place in Super PLAY's list of the 50 best freeware games of all time.[49]

Don't teach your cousin that he can skirt around his parents rules just because he's in a different place.

>>2916504
I thought it was kind of boring.

>>2916494
If he's a loser then he should let his cousin watch him play video games.

>letting 10 year olds play M rated games

Let him play some Ocarina of Time and be done with it.

OP here, so do you really think forcing him to read will make him hate it? His uncle is a truck driver douchebag who doesn't have learning in his heart anywhere, and I just wanted to spark a flame, if at all possible. Is this a bad idea or not?

Also, he's mature enough to play M games, I'll let him skirt the rules either way. I played Doom and MGS when I was 10.

>>2916519
Buy him Harry Potter if he's not seen the movies yet. Or some of Roald Dahl's stuff like Witches, Matilda and CaCF.

>>2916509
maybe you have ADD? Regardless, your taste is wrong and also bad. Enjoy being broken.

>>2916528
Enjoy being enough of a loser to get so upset over someone not liking a video game, lol.

what are you? his mom? enjoy having your 10 year old cousin hate you for making him read.

What kind of pretentious cunt forces someone to read in order to stop them doing something they enjoy?

Way to turn a child off reading for life.

>>2916536
I'm trying to help you, bro. 2+2=4. Cave Story is one of the greatest platformers of all time, both critically and in public reception. People have derived more joy from Cave Story than most platformers of the past decade.

You seem to think 2+2=5 and Cave Story was wasn't fun, which is evidently opinion, but nonetheless a poor one, given the circumstances. It's your own poor judgment I'm trying to aid.

>>2916563
You actually care about the nonsense that is professional video game criticism, so your opinion of my opinion is void.

>>2916528
>maybe you have ADD
It's the other way around, when you have ADD you actually enjoy videogames.

>>2916563
Your logic is retarded and you are getting too worked up over the fact that someone else doesnt like your favorite videogame.

>>2916563
I bet you come straight from /v/.
I can tell it from the "autism" signal you carry around.

>>2916583
No you see, this is a game you have to pay close attention to when you play, because it has a cool sci-fi story plot or whatever

If you bribe him into reading then that's going to give him the message that reading is a horrible chore.

Do not force him to read.
He's 10 yo, he wants to play vidya during the holidays, don't blackmail him OP.
Just get him some harry potter books and have them waiting by his bed. Let him come to it himself.

Also, let him play GTA or something, you'll be the coolest person in the world.

>>2916501

Afterwords get that nigga to read Eustice Mullins books as well

>>2916654
He's not gonna get anywhere reading Harry Potter, sorry.

>>2916748
agreed, the only way to be elite is to be reading fuckin' joyce as a 10 year old

having fun is not allowed, esp for 10 year olds. gotta be serious. and live up to the weirdo nerdy standards of a bunch of nerds on the internet. it's the only way to be elite, as dictated by us, the nerdy 17-24 y.o.s who post on /lit/

>My 10 year old cousin is going to be chilling at my place for the next three weeks. He wants to play a bunch of M rated games
Holy shit your CoD family sucks... /v/ here. Good luck with that little cunt.
With my 11yo brother we played Trine 2, Minecraft, then Pokemon Emerald together.
Previous years we played SuperSmashBros N64, emulated NewSuperMarioBrosWii...
Only violent game we played is TeamFortress2 together on the same team.
Anyway I recommend good coop games like Bionic Commando: Rearmed, Portal 2 coop...
And if he wants some Mature Rated Hardcore shit then try Contra 3 together.
My little bro gave up like a little baby, too hardcore for him.

fuck him in the ass for every hour of games.
he will learn to hate games.
or maybe not.

>>2916759
If you knew what you were talkign about, you wouldn't use such ridiculous hyperbole

>>2916793
i'm pretty sure that's a reasonable response to the claim that "[a ten year old] won't get anywhere reading Harry Potter". because that's fucking dumb. he's 10. it's completely at the right reading level, and having that kind of mindset about reading is fucking ridiculous for a 10 year old anyway.

>>2916787
He will learn to associate games (which he loves) with anal sex. He will then become a homosexual prostitute. AIDS. Then he will die. His parents, after reading his last will and testament, will sue you for anal rape. You will go to prison and be raped anally for the rest of your short life.

>>2916799
What kind of mindset?

>>2916807
"every book i read has to get me somewhere & further my advancement towards being an intellectual, gotta level up with each book i read."

like, seriously, what do you mean when you say that "reading Harry Potter won't get him anywhere", and why is that a bad thing? Where is he supposed to get to, as a 10 year old?

>>2916813
Reading things like Harry Potter in your childhood won't make you into an interesting or creative person. In fact, quite the opposite, it will dull your mind. You need to develop good reading habits as a child, or else you'll still be reading the same schlock as a grown-up.

ITT: Cave Story is a bad game, Harry Potter is a bad book for children, and you shouldn't ask any 10 year old to read at all.

/lit/ in the dictionary is synonymous with competely moronic

If a boy doesn't have the curiosity to read naturally at 10yo then he's "lost", IMO.
He will never be an intellectual. It's either too late or bad genetics... Science to decide.
It doesn't help that modern generation has very short attention span with all that videogame crap.

My little bro is like that, I accepted it.
I tried to convince him but he's too smart for his own good.
He knows he doesn't need books to get pussy. He thinks it's for "nerds".
His opinion is that pleasure is more important than knowledge and wisdom.
He didn't say it but it was obvious. And he's partially right so I don't give a fuck.
To each his own, I'm not his dad.

>>2916654
GTA is shit I'd recommend SaintsRow3 instead.

>>2916817
What would you recommend?

>>2916821
>he will never be an intellectual
>being an intellectual is a good thing

But that's wrong.

>>2916514
Why hasn't anyone seconded this?

>>2916837
Because Wind Waker is better.

>>2916817
>Reading things like Harry Potter in your childhood won't make you into an interesting or creative person. In fact, quite the opposite, it will dull your mind. You need to develop good reading habits as a child, or else you'll still be reading the same schlock as a grown-up.

That's a fucking terrible attitude to take, though, and you're an idiot and a snob. It's dumb in just about any case; it's almost criminally dumb when we're talking about a 10 year old kid.

There's nothing wrong with reading something just because it's fun. Not everything you read has to be about turning you into the perfect, cultured, savant that oyu want to be. Not every book has to be oriented towards leveling you up. If you read some books or watch some movies that are less than perfect but that you enjoy, you won't suddenly turn into a terrible "prole". You'll still be the same person.

It's even more dumb in the case of a 10 year old, because childhood should be fun. He's fucking 10, he has plenty of time to turn into an ultimate elitist. He should enjoy himself. What's wrong with that? You're not just a snob, you're the dumbest one I've seen on /lit/.

>>2916823
Better, more challenging children's books.

>>2916856
such as? Don't dodge the question again, cunt.

>>2916856
reading something that's not challenging and that's just fun will not automatically turn someone into an idiot

you're honestly just crazy if you think this

>>2916480
this

>>2916504
>game critics think it's good therefore it's good
Retard. Regardless, I haven't played it [yet] so I don't have an opinion.

>>2916823
If he was a bit younger I'd suggest Roald Dahl. They're short, but they're remarkably well constructed.

>>2916876
>thinking a game made by a single person is capable of paying off reviewers

Your skill in logic is severely lacking, better crawl back to /v/ where you belong

Did anyone actually address OP's question here? Going by pages is probably better than by hours since for kids the second half of the reading hour gets taken over by anticipation for gaming. More important is that you can engage him by asking questions about what parts he liked, what he thinks is going to happen next, etc. Even if he cheats at it, he'll still have to be processing information. His parents will eventually find out about it but w/e man

>>2916855
>That's a fucking terrible attitude to take, though, and you're an idiot and a snob. It's dumb in just about any case; it's almost criminally dumb when we're talking about a 10 year old kid.

This is horseshit, and I'll explain why.

>There's nothing wrong with reading something just because it's fun.

I never said there was anything wrong with it, you dullard. I don't give a shit if you want to read Harry Potter for the rest of your life and nothing else. Maybe you would have realized that if you had actually paid attention to the conversation, but I shouldn't expect that of someone like yourself who reads so much Harry Potter.

>Not everything you read has to be about turning you into the perfect, cultured, savant that oyu want to be. Not every book has to be oriented towards leveling you up.

Naturally. But Harry Potter will do none of those things, regardless.

>If you read some books or watch some movies that are less than perfect but that you enjoy, you won't suddenly turn into a terrible "prole".

True: turning into a prole is a gradual process.

>It's even more dumb in the case of a 10 year old, because childhood should be fun. He's fucking 10, he has plenty of time to turn into an ultimate elitist. He should enjoy himself.

It's actually much more important as a child than at any other time, as that's when much of our cognitive development takes place. If you are challenged as a child, you will grow to enjoy challenges and seek them out as an adult.

1/2

>>2916896
>What's wrong with that?

Nothing, as I've already said.

>You're not just a snob, you're the dumbest one I've seen on /lit/.

And I think I've refuted this well enough. All you can do is keep making ridiculous assumptions about me, isn't that right?

2/2

>>2916817
Benjamin Franklin or Marcus Aurelius or every important intellectual read (and studied) philosophy/literature during their childhood, not "child novels" HarryPotter bullshit. During renaissance the kids of royalty had to study Latin works and philosophy too.
And they became cultured men, beacons of the western civilization.

This is the problem with liberal education nowadays.
Children do what they want to do...
And it's not in their own interests.

But the funny thing is that we *expect* them to be retards.
When people here recommend Harry Potter, they don't *expect* him to become great and cultured anyway.
So there is self-reinforcing bias. A self-fulfilling prophecy.
We say "anyway he wouldn't be great" and suggest shit books.
Then he'll waste his life away reading fiction instead of being the next Aristotle.

>>2916896
>>2916897
that doesn't mean it's bad to read Harry Potter.
it just means that you should be reading other things in addition to harry potter (or finding other ways to challenge yourself). Harry Potter is entertaining and, if it's not helpful, it's not harmful either.

you said that reading Harry Potter was bad and that people should not do it

ergo, you're an idiot snob

>>2916896
make no argument, deliberately refuse to address your opponent's argument
>I WON I WON I WIN SUCK IT

You haven't convinced me that Harry Potter or any other "easy books" are detrimental to any child's welfare. Feel free to keep trying though, if you can find an argument that deep in your ass.

>>2916860
I liked Louis Sachar's books when I was younger. He's pretty clever. Then there are the usual things, like Alice in Wonderland or Aesop's Fables. Basically, anything that's a certified classic, but also for kids

>>2916901
>the Renaissance
>Roman era
>the American Revolution
>hurr every intellectual blah blah

No arguments, eh? The Romans also drank out of lead pipes.

>>2916901
Excepting the discussion of language education, which I think is a different discussion: that's not really as true as you think. the decline in education is progressive. people aren't that far behind in early childhood; rather, they fall further and further beyond in junior high, high school, and then the process is completed in college.

further: reading entertaining things in your spare time is not going to kill anyone or immediately turn you into a "prole" and demanding that kids never do entertaining things is dumb and terrible and snobbish. reading harry potter is not going to hurt the kid. and, since practically speaking, OP is not going to whup his brother's ass to force him to do geometry, trying something that the kid might actually like to read in the (probably vain, but not entirely forlorn) hope that he develops a taste for reading and continues doing it and finds something that does challenge him is far from the worst strategy there could be.

>>2916914
No, I mean something that's far and away undoubtedly superior to Harry Potter in every sense. The same way as Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man is better than The DaVinci Code.

>>2916904

You didn't even read my post, did you?

>>2916912

>You haven't convinced me that Harry Potter or any other "easy books" are detrimental to any child's welfare.

This is the only point that's worth responding to. Look, what you don't seem to realize is that my original post was in response to someone recommending that the child read Harry Potter in lieu of books that are better and relatively more challenging for a child. In this sense, yes, reading Harry Potter is detrimental to developing good reading habits. I don't care if you just want to read it as some kind of literary Happy Meal. I hope I've made myself clear enough and that you can stop being needlessly rude and obnoxious.

give that little nigga some proust. tell him to read up. he can play vidya after he finishes in search of lost time.

>>2916924
>
No, I mean something that's far and away undoubtedly superior to Harry Potter in every sense. The same way as Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man is better than The DaVinci Code.

The books I mentioned are, but either way, you're just moving the goalposts because you don't have a real argument.

>>2916939
I'll just give my kid Ulysses then. Oh wait, that would be completely idiotic, just like you.

>>2916949
You're just embarrassing yourself now. Seriously, stop it.

>>2916939
>This is the only point that's worth responding to

That was exactly my point, you cock.

> Look, what you don't seem to realize is that my original post was in response to someone recommending that the child read Harry Potter in lieu of books that are better and relatively more challenging for a child. In this sense, yes, reading Harry Potter is detrimental to developing good reading habits

It is, however, a better recommendation than a book which is better and relatively more challenging that the child will not read. Reading Harry Potter is much better for developing good reading habits than not reading at all.

But in any case, as long as you fundamentally agree that reading Harry Potter is not harmful and therefore fundamentally "all right", my major argument with you is pretty much resolved.

>>2916946
I feel that Alice in Wonderland is shit, more sustained by pop culture than any literary merit. In turn Louis Sachar's work is equally shit, but in a more modern, page-turner kind of way. The fact that most of his novels barely pass the 200 page mark doesn't help matters. If I want cardboard characters I'd make them myself.

In turn, Harry Potter is a towering work of literature lauded by critics and audiences alike. It's easily one of the best selling series of all time, and it will undoubtedly be remembered 100 years from now. Can't say that with Sachar's work, and Alice in Wonderland (the text) will probably be the same.

What now, big guy?

>>2916923
My opinion was that the father should force the kid to read and discuss good stuff, ideally.
Whether he likes it or not.

Maybe he'll start good literature later in life... But then it's too late.
It will lack impact on his development.

It is not that hard to realize that the set of characteristics kids naturally like is not the same than the set of characteristics which is best for their future.
It is like, orthogonal.

People say he wouldn't comprehend greater works but he's not supposed to work on it alone.

But anyway 10yo... It's far too late. Forever a pleb.

>>2916955
>no argument
>insult someone

Works every time.

have him play baldurs gate, or some other game with lots of reading in it

>>2916939
>Reading Harry Potter
>Bad for a child

You know what? You are all fucking stupid. A kid reading books in today's society is a miracle in itself. They don't want to read your complex dull shit, they want to read fun kid things that engross them and still challenge them.

This is almost as autistic as /sp/ talking about the teams they support in Football/Soccer.

>>2916968
Kids these days won't play anything if it isn't with a gamepad.
Go to bed, grampa...

>>2916965
you're a fucking idiot

>>2916971
>finding Harry Potter challenging

>>2916971
this is way more autistic than that. /sp/ knows it's all in good fun. These people are dead serious.

To add to the point i made in this
>>2916971
post,
>>2916959
Is right.

>>2916976
You're only proving my point more.

>>2916976
>10 years old

It's just a slog, anyway. The series is like a million words, kids don't have that kind of time.

>>2916981
>implying you can form anything like a coherent point

where's that stupid schopenhauer macro when you need it for trolling purposes?

>>2916987
I know that what I am saying is a good point, because I live in the real world and I came over to this board out of boredom and minor interest.

Theres one or two people in this board who also know that my point is a good one.
The rest, like you, are in denial, because your childhood was probably warped, or forgotten, or something.

inb4 LOL I TROLL YOU

>>2916996
>kids should read Harry Potter because the very act of reading is good in itself
This was your point, more or less?

>>2916981
>>2916978
>>2916971
>>2916967
>>2916959
Listen, if you guys aren't actually going to read my posts, I'm not going to bother responding to you seriously.

But one thing I'll never understand is what you weirdos find so miraculous about a child reading a book like Harry Potter. It's no more challenging than watching TV and playing video games. It does absolutely nothing good for you, unlike reading and appreciating good books.

>>2916996
see
>>2916967

>>2917006
6/10, would get angry again

>>2917003
>It's no more challenging than watching TV and playing video games. It does absolutely nothing good for you, unlike reading and appreciating good books.

Prove it. OH WAIT, YOU'RE MAKING STUFF UP AGAIN.

>>2917008
There's no need to get worked up. It's only the internet.

>>2917018
The fact that so many children are able to read it once and understand it completely (IE be satisfied in their understanding of it) proves that there is no challenge in it.

>>2917003
I'm going to level with you, I read your post afterwards and realised that you werent the kind of person i shouldve been arguing with. I was more addressing the people who disagreed with what i thought, but the thread is getting quite complex.

Anyway, I dont care much for Harry Potter, but that series isnt really my main concern. My point is that a kid reading in the first place is a miracle in itself nowadays. Harry Potter would do some good because it isnt too bad for kid literature. You've got to remember this is a kid.
He's going to enjoy Harry Potter, and Artemis Fowl, and Skulduggery Pleasant, and Percy Jackson, and you know what? That's fine, because its a gateway to mature literature.

So please, just stop, because it isnt often that this happens, but i know im right. And dont claim i havent read your post this time.

Harry Potter is literally the dumbing down of literature.

Know what happened with the dumbing down of movies and video games?
Nothing good. It got kids into it, but it never went back to what it was.
You give kids shit content and they'll want shit content all their life.
Give them good content, help them through it, and they won't be contented by shit anymore.
This is what it means to be hardcore. What do you think Potter kids become? Genius of philosophy?
They all grew up to read Game of Thrones/Hunger Game garbage...

>>2917026
>My point is that a kid reading in the first place is a miracle in itself nowadays.
Who even cares? The act of reading doesn't magically make what you're doing worthwhile.

>>2917026
You're just repeating the same things I've already responded to. Any further argument is a waste of time.

>>2917024
What makes challenge good or bad? Is Ulysses objectively superior to The Great Gatsby? If so, why?

>>2917038
What else do you want me to say? Youre terribly uninformed.

>>2917035
>>2917036

Don't bother. You'll never knock any sense into these people's heads. They're pretty set in their views.

>>2917035
Who let you out of your cage?

>>2917035
>This is what it means to be hardcore

Fuck, everyone is repeating the same point. This argument really has got tiring.

>>2917040
This is beside the point, but

>What makes challenge good or bad?

It's good because it helps develop important things like creativity and problem solving skills. You consider these things important, right?

>>2917040
Challenge is good, see Nietzsche, the Frankfurt School, pretty much everyone else...

>>2917045
You have no reason to call me uninformed. If you really think I'm objectively wrong, then point me to a scientific study about childhood reading or whatever. I'm sure that'll put the last nail in the coffin of my argument

>>2917052
I'll be sure to recommend them when I have a 10 year old of my own.

>>2917049
What makes you think every means of consumption should be challenging? Just curious.

>>2917052
>10 years old
>Nietzsche

>>2917065
>What makes you think every means of consumption should be challenging? Just curious.

You don't even know what I'm arguing. This is pointless.

>>2917065
It's not the 10 year old who has to understand why challenge is important.

>>2917035
mfw when I had a phase of loving Harry Potter from about age 9-11, and now I'm in the middle of a Philsophy degree at a top university.

>>2917071
What are you arguing, exactly? I'm not sure you know yourself.

>>2917072
we're discussing 10 year olds. Maybe you should make a new thread for 12 year olds like you.

>>2917075
Good for you. Now, let's look at the millions of other Harry Potter readers

>>2917077
>What are you arguing, exactly?

Maybe if you had read the thread, you would have found out.

>we're discussing 10 year olds. Maybe you should make a new thread for 12 year olds like you.

You don't know what that person is arguing, either.

>>2917077
>Hey guys, I don't understand how come challenge is important for 10 year olds
>Have you tried looking at Nietzsche or the Frankfurt school? Challenge is important for everyone
>Why would a 10 year old read Nietzsche
Why are you confusing yourself with the subject? Is it brain damage?

>>2917084
the onus is generally on the speaker to be understood. Just, you know, in case you want to be understood at any time.

>>2917082
>y-y-you're just too dumb to understand!

Uh huh. Tell me more.

>>2917097
I understood him perfectly, retard.

Well, I agree with those who said that OP shouldn't be forcing the kid to read, at least. Maybe we can find some common ground there.

>>2917098
That's not what I said, but it's probably true.

>>2917097
You realise you're on a lit board where we discuss shit like language games, problem of other minds and death of the author all the time?

>>2917105
I guess I never considered how someone would deliberately obscure their point to be misunderstood, but if you say that really happens...

>>2917113
There are noumenon everywhere, you just have to believe.

>>2917100
>I agreed I am a pleb like other plebs in this thread and we should let this kid become a pleb too because that is what he wants and everyone should be happy to be a pleb because it is not tiring or straining my neurons and I don't like when I have to think
Potatoes can't stand upright if they're not in a bag...

>>2917098
I'm at least willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're not a complete retard, unlike that other guy who called people autistic weirdos for some reason

>>2917126
For what reason do you believe you aren't autistic? Judging by the content of this thread, it's hard to come to any other conclusion.

>ITT: no child should ever read any straightforward book because it's bad and your kid will grow up to be a complete pleb if he does

stay classy /lit/

>>2917130

That says more about you than it does about me.

>>2917136
If that's really what you gleaned from this thread, then your inability to understand nuanced arguments is only be evidence of your own autism

>>2917138
I feel any sensible person would have no issue encouraging a 10 year old to read Harry Potter, presuming the child never reads otherwise.

I also feel that any sensible person would assume someone who refuses to let a 10 year old read Harry Potter is a control freak at best, an autistic person at worst.

This, of course, is a worst case scenario. But of course, feel free to disagree, and I encourage you to prove me wrong.

>>2917143
see the batshit insanity of these posts:

>>2917123
>>2917079
>>2917035
>>2917003
>>2916965
>>2916946
>>2916901
>>2916896
>>2916897

I have proof. Where's yours?

>>2917149
>I also feel that any sensible person would assume someone who refuses to let a 10 year old read Harry Potter is a control freak at best, an autistic person at worst.

I honestly don't care if kids read Harry Potter, but this has to be one of the dumbest things I've ever read here

>>2917159
my bad, I forgot Christian fundamentalists

>>2917159
>I, and only I, will be the arbiter of my child's reading habits

>>2917157
Those posts are more or less correct. The numerous posts misunderstanding them are my evidence.

>>2917161
>>2917160
A lot of parents are like that, and it's not necessarily bad or abusive in any way.

>>2917164
>Know what happened with the dumbing down of movies and video games?
>Nothing good. It got kids into it, but it never went back to what it was.

>This is what it means to be hardcore. What do you think Potter kids become? Genius of philosophy?
>They all grew up to read Game of Thrones/Hunger Game garbage...

More or less correct? Do tell.

>>2917165
except it impinges on their child's ability to choose what texts they consume, but hey, what's a little freedom down the drain? They didn't need to read those books anyway, I know what's best for them.

>>2917173
>that feel when you've become exactly what you most hate

arghh

>>2917167
That first point is pretty silly, but the rest is true

>>2917178
I guess technically, consider Harry Potter only gained wide recognition 15 years ago. Exactly how many masters of philosophy are under 27 years old? It's like saying the Internet results in 10 year olds failing to get doctorates later on in life. Well, how exactly can you tell?

This thread is fucking hilarious. My god all this shit about harry potter. I was reading that shit at 13-14, and guess what? 2 years later I was reading Descartes, Stirner, Camus, Nietzsche, Bertrand Russell, Plato etc.

I don't want to hear any more shit about Harry Potter making you dumb, because I'm living proof that is bullshit.

>>2917185
I guess I'll backpedal a little and say that I think it's probably true. Most geniuses in a given field pursue it from a young age (or more likely have it forced on them by parents), so they wouldn't have any time for books like Harry Potter. I don't necessarily consider this a good thing, as I've already said, but I think it's undeniably true.

>>2917207
What if you had started... With the latter... 3 years earlier.

>>2917207

You haven't impressed me. A lot of teenage pseudo-intellectuals have read those philosophers, and you very well might be another

>>2917207
>2 years later I was reading Descartes, Stirner, Camus, Nietzsche, Bertrand Russell, Plato etc.
This is the problem. Plebs get the illusion of reading and think they can understand shit.

>>2917216
>>2917218
>>2917223
holy shit you fags are so mad. Goddamn, your butts must be redder than roses.

>>2917216
I wouldn't have understood a word, most likely.

>>2917218
>>2917223
Oh god anons i just realized ur right im actually pretty dumb

>>2917213
>Most geniuses in a given field pursue it from a young age

but you just made that up.

>>2917228
I'll admit, I am a little upset you think I should be impressed that you read Bertrand Russell at 16

>>2917231
No I didn't, someone else made it up for me long ago.

>>2917235
Oh? I suppose you were writing your own social critiques at that point?

>>2917241
>be in jr high
>quote Nietzsche and Plato in English papers
>teacher congratulates parents on being so well-read to pass these things down
>"we don't read"
>never bumped to honors classes
>teacher decides to check my standardized tests at the end of the year
>near-perfect scores
>no one tells me any of this until much later

and I read Dante and Steinbeck around then too, so don't act like reading higher-level texts at a younger age makes you cool because I'm a gigantic faggot.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFFEgAsb9_0&feature=player_detailpage#t=215s
>tfw everyone knows that u r fucked up and everyone knows that I am fucked up but does everyone know that u r more fucked up than me