Yeah these fuckin nerds are using logic and thought to understand the world.
Turned this into a list without OP’s negative framing on them If people genuinely want to look it up later without a negative framing
Because I see no reason to frame them negatively like op has done as these topics are not inherently negative unlike OP’s negative bias of them
And bigots using them doesn’t make them Inherently negative either
- Correlation does not equal causation
- Language shapes thought
- Artificial intelligence
- Stanford prison experiment
- Iambic pentameter
- Schrodinger’s cat
- Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence
- Biblically accurate angels
- What if we live in a simulation ?
- Video essay
- Nuance
- Plato’s cave
- Infographics
- Linguistic prescriptivism
Edit: unnoticed typo
I don’t see anything wrong with any of it. Why is thinking or speaking of any of those things being framed as a negative?
None of those things are negatives, this is just anti-intellectualism. Maybe OP has been corrected by douches in the past. The conspiracy theorist in me thinks OP is trying to normalize shaming critical thinking while finding like-minded individuals.
Or this is an attempt at even more critical thinking, i.e. “These are fine concepts, but if you don’t reckon with the context of what you’re talking about before throwing one of these out because it kinda fits you actually bring conversations down and keep people from exchanging more pertinent ideas and information.”
They probably could have communicated that better if that was their intent, but that’d probably kill any humor potential which was probably more of a priority here.
I think you’re being extremely generous to OP.
You must be fun at parties. Maybe it’s just self-deprecating humour?
I mean, I don’t talk propaganda at parties, do you?
Exactly, thinking and talking about these things is perfectly alright and at 20 they are all quite new to you, so it’s very reasonable to be excited about them.
Yeah I’ve noticed an uptick in atheists on lemmy recently, I don’t support religon at all because of dogma but I also will never support atheism either
What does any of that have to do with atheism?
Just so I understand this correctly, is this a post mocking 20-something year olds by showing topics they believe to be niche, complex, or exclusive to an intelligent audience? And that by understanding these topics they are “propped up” compared to their peers?
Image of average Redditor that feels the inclination to write “fuck Spez” every 5 minutes on the Internet
Sounds like you don’t like thought so you make fun of those that at least try.
This sounds like the epidemy of weaponized ignorance.
For me the meme is that most of these are the very tip of the philosophy and thinking iceberg. And that’s fine. What’s not fine is taking those basic concepts and trying to use them as defeaters for everything. I think this is what it’s poking fun at.
Exactly. It’s taking the piss out off wannabe “deep thinkers” who’ve speed ran philosophy 101 videos on Youtube. Being well read isn’t the joke. The joke is the neckbeards who have to smugly let everyone know that they read a Wikipedia article.
Ironically, this stereotype probably fits most of the ones who are kicking off. Hell, it’s essentially a profile of me. 10 years ago I was that guy saying “hey have you heard about iambic pentameter?”. That’s why I laughed so hard lmao
Being that kind of person isn’t bad or a negative though, and framing being confident in having knowledge as a negative is what drives tyranny, discourages education and critical thinking, enables propaganda to be so effective, and destroys society.
That guy smugly bragging about reading a Wiki article could have legitimately never crossed it before and was genuinely excited in it for the sake of it, and here you are destroying legitimate intellectual curiosity just because society told you that was a no-no. Who’s really more shameful?
You’re taking this way too personally lol
Being intelligent isn’t the joke. It’s putting on the facade of being well read that so many nerdy 20 somethings do.
Society isnt saying don’t be smart. It’s saying be less of a sweaty douchebag. You can be nerdy and fun to be around. It’s not mutually exclusive.
If my comment destroys your intellectual curiosity, then you never had any.
But it is about being intelligent, because people who use those terms are using them in earnest, you just accuse them of trying to sound smart because you want to silence them and make them feel bad for challenging or correcting you, and it works.
People like you destroy intellectual curiosity by doing that all the time, and not just to me. I’ve had to fight to regain what little I was able to, because of people like you. Anti-intellectualism is NOT okay. It is very much its own kind of bigotry, and extremely dangerous.
Society absolutely does tell people not to be smart and it does so largely through people like you. The only way nerdy people are fun to be around to you is when they don’t show it, or only enough to benefit you and certainly never to expose the fact that you don’t know what you’re talking about.
And I’m tired of it. I’m tired of having to walk on eggshells around people like you, shut the fuck up and deal with it when you’re told with evidence you’re wrong.
There’s nothing wrong with being smart. It’s the smugness that is annoying and that’s what this whole thing is about.
If you aren’t one of those people than that’s great and you shouldn’t be bullied.
The fact that the smugness, i.e., the confidence smart people display is annoying IS fundamentally thr problem. Smart people are allowed to be confident, to be smug, to be arrogant like everybody else, and that doesn’t just go away because it makes stupid smug people feel bad about themselves or inferior.
And ALL intelligent people are falsely framed in this light, because the truth is that other people feeling inferior or jealous of them is all this is fundamentally about, and that is wrong.
Stop telling intelligent people they can’t have positive self-esteem. I will NOT walk on eggshells around you anymore. I will not change who and what I am to spare your feelings. No intelligent person should have to.
Sounds like OP lost an argument and is throwing a clever meme-tantrum.
I mean, a lot of these things are good things to consider/know about. For example, you do always have to consider that correlation is not necessarily causation. They’re not really considering the most deep of philosophy, but thinking is generally better than not thinking.
I bet OP thinks that Ben Shapiro qualifies as “thinker”
deleted by creator
That’s basically what this post is
People in this thread take themselves wya too seriously
Just a friendly reminder: The Stanford Prison Experiment was not an experiment. There was no control group, there wasn’t even proper procedures set up. It was just some professor off his rocker that had a dumb idea, made shit up as he went along, forced the outcome, then publicized the results. People always compare it to Milgram. This idiot can’t hold a candle to Milgram.
how is this so accurate?
Easy. All these people grew up on the internet looking at the same websites, reading the same meme, laughing at the same threads.
Universal literacy was supposed to educate the common man to control his environment. Once he could read and write he would have a mind fit to rule. So ran the democratic doctrine. But instead of a mind, universal literacy has given him rubber stamps, rubber stamps inked with advertising slogans, with editorials, with published scientific data, with the trivialities of the tabloids and the platitudes of history, but quite innocent of original thought. Each man's rubber stamps are the duplicates of millions of others, so that when those millions are exposed to the same stimuli, all receive identical imprints. It may seem an exaggeration to say that the American public gets most of its ideas in this wholesale fashion. The mechanism by which ideas are disseminated on a large scale is propaganda, in the broad sense of an organized effort to spread a particular belief or doctrine.Edward L. Bernays, Propaganda
what if we live in a simulation
Matrix (1999) was way ahead of you. Other works of fiction as well.
Go ahead and post your intellectually superior topics.
Right, real intellectuals just post memes mocking people who fluently use basic habits of reason and conversation.
Why, the topic of our intellectual superiority of course!
Maybe I’m a dork, but I think“correlation does not equal causation” is actually a good thing to keep in mind.
I’m reminded of it every time a news story says something is “linked” to something else. I hate it when the word “linked” is used in this way. It’s often lazy journalism and/or a scare tactic. Saying that two things are “linked” implies a stronger relationship than may actually exist. I find it deliberately misleading.
Almost everything on the picture is a good thing to keep in mind. But the creator of the meme depicted it as a thought of a soyjack so there is nothing can be done, we now should abandon that logic entirely.
It’s at its worst when a paper describes how they account for correlation or designed their experiment to confirm causation, but someone doesn’t read the paper and says the line anyway.
You don’t need to read the paper but don’t try to act smart if you can’t be bothered.
That and “this is worthless, they only tested 10 000 people” are the worst
I mostly agree with you, but it’s often used as a phrase to shut down further discussion even when there could be an invisible third event that’s the cause for the two seemingly unrelated events. It’s gets over used by people who want to be quick to sound smart.
That phrase is used exactly to say that there is a third unseen force influencing both events. It’d be pretty strange to use that phrase to say the opposite.
Typically further discussion of the 3rd event isn’t relevant, because they’re not trying to find the cause, they’re trying to disprove a hypothesis.
I’ve seen it used to end discussions. People repeat the wisdom of the phrase without understanding what you just said.
This post would have gotten more mileage on Reddit.
I think the Reddit crowd would have mostly had the ability to laugh at itself on this one.
Most of the responses on here are acting pretty triggered.
You’re absolutely right. It couldn’t possibly have a bad message or promote anti-intellectualism or anything, it is 100% the fault of people who value philosophy and poetry and meaningful thought. How dare they not walk on eggshells around the proudly ignorant
It is anti intellectual. Idk why it has so many upvotes
lol this is so painfully accurate, especially in internet culture where people feel inadequate in real life so they spend their time online wielding their swords of intellect.
I think it’s funny that you’re salty about people having philosophical discussions on the internet. It’s not just for being advertised to and jerkin it.
I’m salty about pseudointellectualism, not real intellectualism. The current format of short post communication on the internet is just not conducive to intellectual discussion.
Do they have /c/iamverysmart here?
Mmmk child
And there’s coup de grace of the iamverysmart, some sort of dismissive insult calling the person immature/child/buddy.
