/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.12701997]

Why do average intelectuals (much less, god forbid average retarded normalpleb) never read anything that contradicts their ideology/beliefs?

Like Darwin never reading anything on christian theology that isn't the average old lady mass going beliefs?

Or Libertarian youtubers who has retarded opinions and clearly never had read any real marxist literature?

Or Marxists who never read any proper critique of their ideology by other economic schools?

[Anonymous No.12702220]

>>12701997
Too long. Can someone summarize?

[Anonymous No.12702226]

>>12702220
Intelectuals are retarded and suffer from dunning krugger narcicism over topics they didn't majored in.

[Anonymous No.12702235]

>>12702226
why

[Anonymous No.12702245]

>>12702235
Most of intelectuals I see on the internet dismiss entire fields of human experience because it hurts their feelings.

[Anonymous No.12702276]

>>12701997
because it's easier to not think for yourself and just parrot first stumbled upon text as truth

[Anonymous No.12702311]

>>12701997
Because if your not in the 100% belief of your own theory then you dont believe in it. also maybe they do they just don't show it ignorance is bliss and if you were to try to construct a counter-argument in a theory you have a obviously less understanding of you will get smashed for judging said theory like a mongol

[Anonymous No.12702320]

>>12701997
You already made this thread in /his/ and got called a retard, stop breathing.

[Anonymous No.12702321]

Intellectuals exist to push an agenda in a bloated manner. The only person who knew how to deal with them was Pol Pot.

[Anonymous No.12702339]

You need a lot of autism to really dedicate yourself to an ideology thats why liberalism Just Works tm

[Anonymous No.12702378]

>>12701997
Because thinking critically about your beliefs makes you start doing philosophy, which is a black hole of endless doubt and confusion

In general people have beliefs for a few reasons, 1. because they have obvious immediate application, ie. theyre empirical, and 2. For social posturing: to belong to a group, and to peacock your ability to understand and express complicated ideas. 3. Because the beliefs make them feel good

Stuff like Christianity and Marxism is pretty much entirely reasons 2 and 3, which do not benefit from critical thought. They're not practical beliefs, where there is actually some real outcome dependent on them. Thinking critically actually goes directly against the motives people have to believe those things

[Anonymous No.12702390]

>>12701997
>. When his own exams drew near, Darwin applied himself to his studies and was delighted by the language and logic of William Paley's Evidences of Christianity[33] (1794). In his final examination in January 1831 Darwin did well, coming tenth out of 178 candidates for the ordinary degree.[34]

Darwin had to stay at Cambridge until June 1831. He studied Paley's Natural Theology or Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity (first published in 1802), which made an argument for divine design in nature, explaining adaptation as God acting through laws of nature.
>Darwin's family tradition was nonconformist Unitarianism, while his father and grandfather were freethinkers, and his baptism and boarding school were Church of England.[27] When going to Cambridge to become an Anglican clergyman, he did not doubt the literal truth of the Bible.[33] He learned John Herschel's science which, like William Paley's natural theology, sought explanations in laws of nature rather than miracles and saw adaptation of species as evidence of design.[35][36] On board HMS Beagle, Darwin was quite orthodox and would quote the Bible as an authority on morality.[184] He looked for "centres of creation" to explain distribution,[59] and suggested that the very similar antlions found in Australia and England were evidence of a divine hand.[61]
>By his return, he was critical of the Bible as history, and wondered why all religions should not be equally valid.[184] In the next few years, while intensively speculating on geology and the transmutation of species, he gave much thought to religion and openly discussed this with his wife Emma, whose beliefs also came from intensive study and questioning.[96] The theodicy of Paley and Thomas Malthus vindicated evils such as starvation as a result of a benevolent creator's laws, which had an overall good effect. To Darwin, natural selection produced the good of adaptation but removed the need for design,[185] and he could not see the work of an omnipotent deity in all the pain and suffering, such as the ichneumon wasp paralysing caterpillars as live food for its eggs.[146] Though he thought of religion as a tribal survival strategy, Darwin was reluctant to give up the idea of God as an ultimate lawgiver. He was increasingly troubled by the problem of evil.[186][187]
>Darwin remained close friends with the vicar of Downe, John Brodie Innes, and continued to play a leading part in the parish work of the church,[188] but from around 1849 would go for a walk on Sundays while his family attended church.[183] He considered it "absurd to doubt that a man might be an ardent theist and an evolutionist"[189][190] and, though reticent about his religious views, in 1879 he wrote that "I have never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God. – I think that generally ... an agnostic would be the most correct description of my state of mind".[96][189]

You just had to fucking Google it, anon.

[Anonymous No.12702433]

>>12702390
OP here, I made a mistake and wasn't talking about Darwin, but píc related.

[Anonymous No.12702458]

>>12702378
>Christianity does not benefit from critical thought.
What's it like to be a hypocrite?

[Anonymous No.12702481]

>>12702458
Well we're all hypocrites but personally my existence is just appalling. How does Christianity benefit from critical thought? It's a revealed religion

[Anonymous No.12702491]

>>12702433
I was about to plan on reading Dawkins bc of you op. Bc I was planning on going the Christian route and don’t want any cognitive biases. But now I know you’re retarded...

[Anonymous No.12702500]

>>12702491
I accept I made a freudian slip, however Dawkings refutation of God seems fedora tier and ignores basic shit like noetics.

[Anonymous No.12702509]

>>12701997
>average

That's your hint.

[Anonymous No.12702700]

>>12702500
What do I read then in counter to Christianity? Maybe something enlightening me on religion and control or what?..

[Anonymous No.12702712]

>>12702700
that's my main issue, you should read both sides of the debate to get a proper full view of the issue.

reading only christians or only atheist will make you into another usefull sheep.

read both christian refutations and atheists.

[Anonymous No.12702747]

>>12702712
Atheists kind of disgust me desu because of their superiority complex..
Dawkins is ok I guess. I’ve seen some of his videos like the one on the evolution of the eye.

[Anonymous No.12702780]

Life is usually too short and busy for most people to actively engage in "thought" as it, even if the will to it was present. It's hard enough for people to dedicated themselves to the topics of their liking, much less to get the whole scope of it by also engaging with its critique.

[Anonymous No.12702791]

>>12701997
On the Perpetuation of Ignorance: System Dependence, System Justification, and the Motivated Avoidance of Socio-Political Information by Steven Shepherd

[Anonymous No.12702800]

>>12701997
>Like Darwin never reading anything on christian theology that isn't the average old lady mass going beliefs?
Darwin read the Bible though, and only came up with his ideas because of a thought he had in a dream. He then had frequent religious nightmares after that. Too bad you wouldn't know that because you are exactly what you criticize.

[Anonymous No.12703514]

>>12702747
You are having a spook.

[Anonymous No.12703534]

>>12701997
Frogposters all need to be put down.

[Anonymous No.12703544]

>>12703534
gently into comfy beds

[Anonymous No.12704902]

>>12702378
Correct

[Anonymous No.12705348]

What are some books that have greatly challenges you all's views?

[Anonymous No.12705386]

>>12705348
*Challenged

[Anonymous No.12705394]

>>12701997
Because those kinds of things are physically painful.

[Anonymous No.12705430]

>>12705348
Revolution Betrayed by Leon Trotsky