ITT

[Anonymous No.18008602]

We add more to the midwit core. Add one author yourself each post.

[Anonymous No.18008626]

>>18008602
chomsky is there only because you disagree with his politics.
What he did in linguistics is way beyond the midwit zone.
I guess same could be said about Dawkins and his work in evolutionary biology.

[Anonymous No.18008631]

>>18008602
Why is Freakonomics there? It doesn't really try to take any hard stance for or against anything, it's just
>huh, ain't that neat?
the book.

[Anonymous No.18008637]

Stirner isn't midwit.

[Anonymous No.18008646]

>>18008626
>>18008631
>>18008637
The chart is authors midwits like, not that the authors have to be midwits themselves.

[Anonymous No.18008647]

>>18008626
that's not what they're appreciated for by most people so that's completely irrelevant.
>mu-uh linguistics chomsky is a genius you can't criticize!
dude nobody cares except linguists.

[Anonymous No.18008648]

>>18008637
t. midwit

[Anonymous No.18008650]

>>18008602
Farenheit 451, literally only "tv bad book good", on par with the Hunger Games in thematic dystopian worldbuilding
Fuck you I'm not editing it in

[Anonymous No.18008728]

>>18008647
I am a fourth year linguistics student and turns out a lot of linguists hate him. Generative grammar is a dogma

[Anonymous No.18008782]

>>18008602
Midwits don’t read Eco

My top things for midwits:
Bad Feminism by Roxane Gay

Rise of the Creative Class by Richard Florida

Neil deGrasse Tyson

Hamilton the Musical

FiveThirtyEight

The Subtle Art of not Giving a F*ck by Mark Manson

Grit by Angela Duckworth

Every recent book about ‘Democracy in Decline’, I’m thinking of Tim Snyder, Anne Applebaum, Francis Fukuyama, Bruce Mequista etc.

Te-Nahasi Coates

The Bad Faith Podcast

Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahenman (it’s an excellent book, but midwits definitely love it)

All books written by hosts of MSNBC, especially Rachel Maddow and Chris Hayes.

[Anonymous No.18008796]

Remove Spencer from the list.

[Anonymous No.18008801]

>>18008602
at least they read.
and you're here shitposting instead of reading.

[Anonymous No.18008811]

>>18008728
Linguistics is extremely uninteresting. How many langs do you speak?

[Anonymous No.18008813]

>>18008602
Remove Eco, or at least put just his meme book on fascism, the way Machiavelli's Prince is on there and not the whole opus. The rest of Eco's work is by no measure midwit.
With that exception, the pic is excellent.

[Anonymous No.18008814]

>>18008602
Eco is midwit? Explain that one

[Anonymous No.18008817]

>>18008646
Define midwit please. I have never encountered anyone in real life who even know who Stirner is.

On the other hand people like Sargon, Rogan and Oliver etc. don't fit either in my opinion since they are all very mainstream and considered hack or lowbrow by most.

If midwit is supposed to mean people who are aware of mainstream pop culture intellectuals and have read some of the classics it seems like a way too broad category to be meaningful.

[Anonymous No.18008831]

>>18008796
I agree. Richard has his flaws but I don't think he or most of the people who have stuck with him are midwits. The majority of the dissident right dislikes him at this point so if hes just supposed to be a stand in for midwitted white nationalists, he's a poor choice. I don't really like him myself but he's smarter than people give him credit for.

[Anonymous No.18008870]

>>18008782
>Midwits don’t read Eco
Every Redditor midwit is obsessed with his article on fascism.

[Anonymous No.18008879]

>>18008813
>>18008814
>>18008870
Again the list is not calling Eco a midwit it’s saying midwits like him

[Anonymous No.18008908]

>>18008602
You are a midwit if you think Stirner should be associated with the others in this picture

[Anonymous No.18008912]

Improved

[Anonymous No.18008914]

>>18008870
And that's a tiny aspect of his work.

>>18008879
Still doesn't apply to Eco. How many midwits read his stuff on medieval aesthetic philosophy, or even something as popular as Name of the Rose?
In the same way Machiavelli is popular only through one single text, the Prince, while the rest of his influential and once-popular work is totally ignored by the midwits. It's good to draw that line, and appropriate to only put the Prince and Eco's book on fascism on there.

[Anonymous No.18008929]

>>18008914
I fixed it in the above pic.

[Anonymous No.18008943]

>>18008908
He’s definitely a leftist midwit obsession just like Hoppe/Sowell are rightist midwit obsessions.

[Anonymous No.18008966]

>>18008912
Subtle art of not giving a fuck is tardcore not midwitcore

[Anonymous No.18009034]

>>18008626
Delusional God is a midwit book. Even if the Selfish Gene isnt.

[Anonymous No.18009051]

>>18008602
I never saw someone talk about Piketty oy Mill. Harry Potter is a must

[Anonymous No.18009096]

>>18008912
Godel Escher Bach is midwit-core? I highly doubt that, but I don't talk to real life people about books so I have no calibration.

[Anonymous No.18009241]

This thread is fucking trash
>Inb4 t.midwit
Cope and seethe, the concept of midwit has been tossed around just for shit talking against other people so many times it has lost any real meaning by niw

[Anonymous No.18009242]

>>18008602
Midwits would be the ones who engage in rage politics and superficial analysis such as Sargon, Ben Shapiro, John Oliver, Joe Rogan, pretty much any political youtuber, and so on. Non-midwits would be actual high-IQ accomplished thinkers/academics/writers like Chomsky, Pinker, Sowell, maybe Taleb, and so on.

[Anonymous No.18009246]

>>18008879
But that's what I was asking. I don't see his books having midwit appeal. Name of the Rose , for example, is his most famous book, and is pure medieval catholic kino that I can't see some "I fucking love science" redditor appreciating

[Anonymous No.18009834]

>>18008626
What he did to linguistics is worse than anything he ever wrote about politics.

[Anonymous No.18009991]

Is this the worst thread /lit/ has ever produced?

[Anonymous No.18010066]

>>18008647
I am not a linguist and I disagree with Chomsky politically and i think his linguistics work was watershed, so there

[Anonymous No.18010071]

[Anonymous No.18010776]

Is the shock doctrine really a popular book for midwits?

[Anonymous No.18011142]

>>18009246
His article on fascism like I said

[Anonymous No.18011178]

>>18008602
Olavo de Carvalho, Leandro Karmal and Mário Sérgio Cortella

[Anonymous No.18011274]

>>18008602
You are an insufferable faggot.

[Anonymous No.18011407]

>>18011178
Olavo is definitely midwit but Karnal and Cortella are something below it alongside Pondé.

[Anonymous No.18011458]

>>18008811
>he doesn't know about psycholinguistics

[Anonymous No.18011498]

>>18008602
Add the Wikipedia logo

[Anonymous No.18011621]

>>18009096
The more logic I learn the more I hate the book. That aside I hated the tone too. I know someone smart who likes it so maybe it's not midwot but he likes a lot of stuff that *is* midwit-tier for some reason.

[Anonymous No.18011655]

>>18008602
Did you get Vonnegut and the guy who wrote master and margiritA?

[Anonymous No.18013292]

>>18008817
if you can't intuitively tell who is a midwit, it's probably because you are a midwit yourself

[Anonymous No.18013296]

Cool, I only like one of them.

[Anonymous No.18013313]

Wouldn't it be better to make a list of people who aren't midwits? People we could all agree on like Joyce and Tolstoy

[Anonymous No.18014035]

>>18008602
>Alan Watts
shit chart

[Anonymous No.18014185]

>>18008602
>Hoppe
>midwit
Also 48 laws of power is a good book despite its midwit audience

[Anonymous No.18014284]

>>18011498
this, but its used by everyone just midwits in particular

[Anonymous No.18014304]

>>18009034
>Delusional God
Confirmed for not having read said (shit) book.

Or even tangentially registered its actual content.

[Anonymous No.18014345]

>>18008943
Hoppe/Sowell are so effectively marketed
But pic related is Sowell's Magnum Opus...yes it skirts the truth on certain /pol/ related truths but you learn how to please publishers by hearing the strained way certain presentations suddenly bend over backwards to please conservatives.

[Anonymous No.18014836]

>>18008602
Zizek.

[Anonymous No.18015145]

>>18008602
You can add Mushashi for the typical weeb midwit.
And remove Eco, his history of beauty is highbrow as fuck.

[Anonymous No.18015550]

>>18013292
In a way, not paying any mind about what or who a midwit is has a 50/50 chance of implying that the individual could be of higher thinking or of blissful ignorance propelled by a lack of intelligence, or even a combination of both

[I hate women No.18015825]

>>18008637
Based and correct

[Anonymous No.18015890]

>>18008637
This

[Anonymous No.18015948]

>>18009242
>pinker
>non-midwit
almost go me there

[Anonymous No.18016765]

>>18011621
what logic books do you recommend? i've read some analytic philosophy (mostly popper), but in the vein of GEB i've also read "infinity and more", which i think suffers from very similar psuedo-deep masturbation without edification.

[Anonymous No.18016819]

>>18008602
It's missing Paul Auster.