/lit/ - Literature

This one time I was on /lit/ and this guy made a thread about pseudo intellectuals and he spelled Dostoevsky's name wrong.
mfw

>>1119000

>>implying in my language it's not spelled that way

One time at work I was readying Thomas Hardy's The Woodlanders. This guy came in and commented on how good a book it is. I agreed. Before he walked away he called Hardy a great American author.

>>1119008
>>implying I knew you were crossing a language border.

>apology

One time on /lit/ I saw some guy correct another like a bitch, but then he was corrected and herp derp herp herp.

>>1119010
mfw

One time I was an troll and niggers were shot out in space!

Every time I'm on /lit/ there is at least one moron who doesn't know the difference between a book and a text

>>1119008
What language is that?

>>1119023
are you a wizard?

Please explain these diffferances oh great one

Psuedo Intellectuals? About any adult who tells me his favorite book is The Stranger, The Great Gatsby or some other book he had to read in the 10th grade simply because he has not read since then.

My aunt is actually an english teacher and has never read Dostoevsky, Fitzgerald, Hemingway, Kerouac, or Faulkner.
To all of the english majors on the board hoping to be a teacher? Turns out you're probably vastly overqualified

>>1119008

>implying the names of authors are spelled differently in different languages

Seriously? That's one thing I won't believe until I see it.

>>1119033
Lol none of those authors qualify a teacher and they aren't as great as everyone thinks. nice try homo

>>1119036
Really?
Well, it's mostly foreign names being changed when put in the English form, but still. I'll assume you really didn't know names change from language to language.

>>1119036

>>1119036
Since Russia does not use the same alphabet as English, there are generally several accepted spellings of the same name.
ie, Dostoevsky, Dostoyevsky, Dostoevski, or Tolstoy/Tolstoi.

>I'm 23 year old nursing student.
>Reading Harry Potter
>Someone tells me it's allegorical.
>mfw
It's a goddamn children's story. Treat it as so.

>>1118980
>implying /lit/ isn't full of pseudo intellectuals and >pretentious jackasses

>>1119036
I'm going to kick you in the balls

>>he wears a black t-shirt that has "God is Dead- Nietzsche" on it

anyone who attends a formal occasion dressed in academicky fake formal wear, like shitty vintage bell bottoms they picked up at a consignment shop, a tee-shirt, and skintight sweater over that. and they don't realize that their clothing is ridiculous.

>>1119036
"Fiodor Michajłowicz Dostojewski (ros. Фёдор Миха́йлович Достое́вский, Ѳедоръ Михайловичъ Достоевскій) (ur. 30 października 1821 (11 listopada ns.) w Moskwie, zm. 28 stycznia 1881 (9 lutego ns.) w Sankt Petersburgu) – pisarz rosyjski."
So yeah, fuck you dumb cunt.

You guys only rage about these people because they remind you of yourself 6 months ago.

Christ college kids are annoying.

> reading The City and the Pillar
> some chick asks me if I am homosecks

>>1119000
dostoevsky
dostoyevsky
dostoevski

-and theres more.

>>1119106

Puh-leaz, I am like this right now. I've read wikipedia summaries and spark notes on all the major writers so I can hold up a convo with the hot lit chicks from the other side of the campus

>>1119053
>children's story
>motherfuckers dying left and right all the time in really gruesome ways

Yeah, no. It's allegorical moralistic christfag crap. Sorry.

>>1119100
>Dostojewski
>jewski
>jew

The irony..it's killing me!

>>1119053
yeah it's allegorical, but probably not in the way she is thinking

>>1119115
Is it true that the Jews cut the fingers of young children?

>>1119120

No, but they've been known to crucify children.

>>1119093
scarves in warm weather

>>1119121

and make bubblegum out of babby foreskins

>>1119120
No. lol. Just foreskin on the penis.

(i just remember when penis would filter in a different color)

>>1119113

Honestly I think the author just lost herself completely trying to fill deadlines. The first 3 books are cute children's books. The 4th is the beginning of something much darker leading to a climactic 7th book which jumped the shark wherever it was intelligible enough to be understood.

>>1119121
I read it in a book.

>>1119127
It's from the Bros K, bro. Dostoevsky hated dem jews.

>>1119129
The series was meant to mature with the reader, but yeah the 7th book is possibly one of the most disappointing things in literature.

Anything can be made allegorical if you want it to be. Whether or not its intentional is still the sole-discretion of the author.

>>1119129

Christ the 7th book was messed up. Rowling was really trying too hard, especially with Gan...err Dumbledore. I mean, he turns out to be this manipulative homosexual deviant who only wants to destroy Wizard Hitler, no matter the costs

Also, pythons bursting out of old ladies' corpses. Giggity.

>>1119113
-_-

>>1119138

>pythons bursting out of old ladies' corpses. Giggity

om nom nom

>in Barnes and Noble about 4 months back
>see a cute girl reading Kerouac in the coffee shop
>buy coffee start conversation about Kerouac with her
>moves to favorite authors. I say Pynchon
>she says "ANN Rand"
>mfw it's pronounced "EIN" (rhymes with nine) Rand
>still gave me a handjob later that day
>never see her again

was I trolled?

>>1119148
...no? You got a handjob. How was that trolling? You just won.

>>1118980
made my day

>>1119138

man screw Dumbledore. How about Snape turning from brilliant asshole into pretty much every guy on /r9k/ but with magic powers[/spoiler

>>1119029
> The Great Gatsby
> pseudo-intellectual

>>1119138
>>1119138

>mfw when the second book doesn't even take place at Hogwarts for the majority
>it's basically fucking camping
>they take forever to destroy one horcrux
rest are destroyed with relative ease.

what the fucking fuck fuck?

>Sit down to have lunch with friends at McDonalds
>A friend of a friend is with us for the first time
>He gets a salad and complains that we are eating at McDonalds
>We talk about movies, he tells us Shawshank Redemption is a horrible movie.
>Topic turns to books
>He whips out Sun Also Rises
>Tells us we should only read Sun Also Rises and For Whom the Bells Toll if we want to read Hemingway and that EVERYTHING else by him sucks.
>Says 'good read' or 'quick read'
>My face

>>1119186
>>1119186
woops meant 7th book
sorry

>>1119148
No, it's just it doesn't matter. Randy is a tedious bitch who would not know a subtle moral if it rammed a Smart Car up her penny pinching cunt. Although I suppose if it did so, it wouldn't be very subtle. But any way, you shouldn't give a shit if anyone pronounces it correctly. Dr. Seuss' name was pronounced "Soise" but no one gave a fuck.

>>1119186

By the 7th book, she had completely lost the ability to regulate the speed of the plot. I know what it looks like to get lost writing a story, and I see it so much in that book.

Captcha; mantrum inkject

>>1119197

He dissed the shawshank?! WTF!?

>>1119186
At least Dobby finally died. Little cunt.

>>1119217

See this is why I love Bellatrix. Crazy bitch shanks minorities and doesn't afraid of anything

>at some library
>ask a girl who workd there if they have a book called Satyricon by Petronius, because I didn't find it
>girl searches in the computer for like two minutes
>"I'm sorry, I have absolutely no result"
>"are you serious? that's weird, it's a famous Greek text..."
>"I dunnolol, I tried several spellings but I have nothing"
>take a look at the screen
>she thought Satyricon was the name of the author
>mfw

This one time on /lit/ a guy for Petronius was Greek.

>>1119271
I lol'd.

>>1119248

You're a massive pretentious faggot.

>>1119285

you know what? everyone on this board is

>>1119289

You read Stephen King and listen to Linkin Park and can't get your head around why people like classic literature or real music, so you put it down to pretension, as if everyone around you is just faking it, and you're the only one leading an honest life.

I've got news for you: You're subhuman trash. You're a fucking idiot.

>>1119289
Speak for yourself

>>1119307
First: Stephen King is a modern master of the written word. This is not open to debate.
Second: I have no opinion on Linkin Park whatsoever.
Third: You are pretentious because you expect everyone to know who Petronius is, even though very little before Shakespeare is considered famous classic literature in modern culture. Also, Roman, not Greek, as noted.

>real music

there you have it

penis acrobatics and self anal fucking

>Out with some people in my advanced English class in college.
>They are all ultra pretentious and dull, one girl constantly tries to portray herself as some kind of tortured genius, constantly informing me of how much she is like Stuart Sutcliffe.
>Walking back to the station when someone strikes up a conversation about zombies.
>one girl, dressed in a blue velvet dress and dark ray bans (it's a perfect day) wisely notes that "Zombies don't exist, anyway".
>Stuart Sutcliffe girl utters, with a dry smile, "Except for the Labour Party".
>entire group erupts into laughter and concurrence.
>mfw.

>>1119310
He's right though. This board does have the highest pretentiousness index of any of the boards on 4chan, except maybe /mu/ and /int/.

go back to facebook

>>1119319
Witty political commentary. Ha.

>>1119314

>First: Stephen King is a modern master of the written word. This is not open to debate.

It certainly is open to debate. Try and name me one work of fiction produced by Stephen King that is considered a classic - you can't, can you? He writes bestsellers. I could substitute "Dan Brown" for "Stephen King" in your statement and it would hold the same weight.

>Second: I have no opinion on Linkin Park whatsoever.

Then you lack an appreciation for music. Your credibility is falling even more. I'm sure you've heard them; if you can't discern that the music they make is trash from the first listen, then you lack something in your brain that I and many others have.

>Third: You are pretentious because you expect everyone to know who Petronius is, even though very little before Shakespeare is considered famous classic literature in modern culture. Also, Roman, not Greek, as noted.

I'm not that guy. Why do you assume that?

>>1119323

Maybe I shouldn't be so affrontive.

They always say I look miserable, and people don't like that.

>>1119319

>>mfw these people will never produce anything of value because they are too busy exploring their own anal cavity

>Walk into The Strand in NYC
>Ask stock kid if there's a copy of 1001 Arabian Nights in stock
>Kid uses the in-store search, asks if it's spelled as "knights"

>encounters with pseudo intellectuals

I visit /lit/ every day.

linking park might be a bit to screamy-shouty for me but the mike shinoda album is the shit. not that mike's a good rapper but he has styles of beyond on pretty much every track, and the production and the scratches are tits

some real gems on there fo sho

>Round a friends after a night out drinking
>brought back some girls to his place (where he has tons of books)
>end up in conversation about books with Dutch girl
>say I don't really have a favourite book and inquire into hers
>she says "please, don't laugh", and the only real books she's read and liked is the Twilight saga
>visage de moi

>>1119332
Nah I think they sound a bit conceited. I don't see how it's witty at all...

>>1119319

Which Labour party were they talking about?

>>1119358

The American one.

>>1119358

British.

>>1119330

First (again): No it's not open for debate. And whether or not it is open for debate is not open for debate either. I'd like you to note that this could get recursive if you push the matter.

Second second (cwutididthar?): I was simply acknowledging the fact that I have not heard enough of their music to pass judgement on them, and you saw this as an opinion in opposition to your own. This Irked the vicious little part of your brain that tells you that all smart people have the exact same opinions as you, and that anyone who displays even the tiniest bit of dissent is a toe-nibbling camel-fart. That's PRETTY FUCKIN PRETENTIOUS, WOULDN'T YOU SAY? Not that you would, but I'm just sayin'.

Third [again (again)]: I'm sorry I mistook you for someone else. These are the perils of the anonymous system. That being said, you are still pretentious because you make assumptions about peoples' mental abilities based on an affront to your petty intellectual pride (that is to say, U MAD?).

Talking to a guy I know from college at the pub, he's talking about Ulysses and it's meanings etc, etc...

A few days later I'm over at his apartment and notice on his book shelf he only has the spark notes.

>>1119337
Dude, if he actually was a kid, cut him some slack.

>>1119374

Maybe he was reading it and left it somewhere else.

>>1119314

once my friends went to a trivia thing and the guy read an excerpt from a King book and we had to answer who the author was. Creative writing major there loudly said "no way it's Stephen King, he can't write that well"


hehehe

>>1119374
wonder if i should start doing this kind of thing...

>>1119386

Flame me all you want, but King is pretty much the Dickens or Hugo of his time.

>>1119399
That's pushing it a bit.

The obvious comparison would be Poe.

>>1119399
Yeah and Bret Easton Ellis is the Tolstoy or modern literature.

so one time I was on /lit/ and the whole board was filled with pseudo intellectuals.

>>1119419

>Business as usual on /lit/

And not a single fuck was given that day.

>>1119319

>Labour
>Zombies

lol witty political Mock the week lite jibe! lolol!

On that note I used to know a guy who'd watch Mock The Week and everytime we'd see him after it was on he'd deliver the whole show to us, even though we'd either not watched it, watched HIGNFY (superior), or watched MTW anyway.
He thought he was shit hot.

>>1119419
Not true, some of us don't even put the effort of pretending to be intellectuals.

>>1119399

not trying to flame you at all. I was just laughing on the inside because she was a creative writing major and said that. Looked stupid when she realized King was the right answer

>>1119431

There was a guy in my high school that used to regurgitate episodes of family guy or scrubs all day, every day.

It's the most crass form of pretension.

>>1119431
I have a guy like that in my "friends circle" he pretty much repeats all the jokes from Mock The Week. The worst part is, he knows nothing about politics or news in general.

>>1119452
No, that's just a pathetic attempt at humor, fueled by the misguided belief that originality is for suckers.

>> at a bar with my niggers
>>this douche that's with us is trying to impress some chicks we brought along by talking about psychoanalysis
>>he claims that homosexuals are that way because they are stuck in the anal stageof developement
>>my face when I am a resident psychiatrist

like being smart ever got anyone laid

>>1119466
>anal
>huhuh-huh
>heh heh-heh

>>1119469

Sartre.

>>1119466
I had a friend who did a NC community college course on Psychology and he keeps talking about the Anal, Oral, Genital etc stages.

He also name drops psychologist like Watson, Rogers, Jung etc like we know what the fuck he's talking.

keep telling yourself that ugly

>>1119469
I know a smart person who got laid...
...they were female.

>>1119466

>mfw everyone in my sociology class is a Jung fanboy and dismiss Freud as a "sexually delirious twat" rather than the father of modern psychoanalysis.

>>1119488

Jung was still cool though

>>1119488
I don't see why a sexually delirious twat can't be the father of modern psychoanalysis. As they say, you don't have to be crazy to work here, but it helps!

>>1119488

Is that who I think it is and what

>Comments page for a you tube video about socialism
>People bickering left and right about why socialism does or doesn't work
>Someone brings up 1984 as the reason socialism cannot work
>Some other retard replied that 1984 was set in a "State Capitalist" society.
>"State Capitalist"

How the fuck someone came to that conclusion is beyond me.

>>1119488
Fucking non-yanks think they know shit.
Edward Thorndike is where it's at.

>>1119513
>Thorndick
That will be all

>>1119501

Freud was a badass and you know it.

>>1119510

It's Orwell, yeah.

Anyone who says they mostly read classic literature is a pseudo intellectual. There is tons of great literature that has been written in the past and is being written today that is not considered "classic". I'm not taking about pulpy shit either, hurr durr harry potter is great art, I'm talking by shit of equal quality to classics, just lacking the recognition or the test of time that it takes for something to become classic. A real intellectual would be able to find these books and evaluate their worth as art, rather than relying on what is considered classic to know if a book is good or not. If you only read classics you're gonna run out of classics in a few years. I can only conclude then that most of the pseudo intellectuals /lit/ started reading seriously only a few years ago, because you're still able to find classics to read.

TL;DR /lit/ is all pseudo intellectuals

>>1119518

he was very badass, IA

>>1119513

pfff behaviorist, how primitive and reductionist
Now, Piaget...that's a different story.

The last posts of this thread pretty much sum up how psychologists interact with one another. My guy is superior to your guy.

but srsly, Piaget rocks

>>1119530
>If you only read classics you're gonna run out of classics in a few years
I was gonna reply seriously until I got up to this point.

>>1119530

I agree with this, however there is also an intolerable amount of shit published today.

Time is the only genuine judge in terms of what literature is really great and what is trendy nonsense, what is for it's time and what is for all time.

It's very rare that genius is appreciated in it's time. Just look at Beethoven.

>>1119544

>it's time

>>1119544

The real pretentious people are those who are sure they can find timeless literary classics in today's literature.

>>1119541
I was gonna reply seriously until I realized you probably won't have time to read my post because you seem to be
> implying you read at a very slow rate

>>1119557
how was i implying that i (or you?) read at a slow rate?

>>1119553
exactly. i feel some people on this board don't actually know the purpose of a critical reviewer.

>>1119557

dude, if you don't realize there's enough "classic" literature to last several lifetimes, you're a complete dipshit.

books have been around for MILLENIA. maybe you're limiting your self to Western Lit? I dunno, but there's no way you seriously think one person could read everything "classic" in like three years.

>>1119544
Actually, I am the only genuine judge.

...

This is not open to debate.

>>1119567
Yous seemed to think there was something wrong with my statement
> If you only read classics you're gonna run out of classics in a few years
I assumed that you believed that you could constantly read classics for longer than a few years. I further assumed this was because you were a slow reader.

Not really psuedo-intellectual as much as /lit/ rage.

>Reading Farenheit 451 in AP American Lit/Comp
>Gives us two days to read it, only 150 pages, no big deal
>Two people, including myself, read it
>The rest complain about how boring and long it is
>Others brag about reading to page 60

Goddamnit people. This saddens me more than it pisses me off. It's an AP course for fuck's sake, I'd hate to see the regular classes.

Not just my class ether, the professor commented that his other 3 classes did the same thing.

>>1119592
Oh well maybe you could see why this never occured to me as your meaning here >>1119585
retard.

>me and my friend meet up after first psychology class we've ever taken
>we were in different classes
>i had an introduction and guide to the topics we were going to cover, exams and marking ect
>he proceeds to "psychoanalyse me" cuz that's what they learnt about
>mfw he just flipped forward in the text book and said random shit.
>no longer a friend.

>>1119589

Exceptional literature in objective terms, as in deep, prophetic or revolutionary I mean.

If the Twilight saga means more to you than 1984, then that's fine, but Twilight will be forgotten.

Don't listen to TyBrax; he believes in God.

>>1119599
Most people just take APs for college credit, they don't really care at all about the subject matter.

>>1119585
> maybe you're limiting your self to Western Lit

yes this is what I'm doing, or at least what I was talking about in that post, because it's pretty much the only thing talked about on /lit/. And unless you greatly exaggerate what can be considered classic literature, there is really only a few years of classic western literature. I should probably state that by classic literature I mean a classic works of art valued for it's artistic qualities. There is probably a lifetime of reading to be had of timeless works, but those works may be more interesting for their historical or sociological implications rather than their artistic qualities e.g. the bible isn't great art, it is considered classic for other reasons.

>>1119607
>basing discussion on people rather than their arguments

>>1119607
>Exceptional literature in objective terms
>deep, prophetic or revolutionary
>objective

>>1119605
If the Twilight saga means more to you than 1984, then you are wrong.

My intuition compelled me to make a joke about the removal of various animals from vaginas, but I was to lazy to think of one

>>1119607

>>1119603

I feel your pain. When I tell I am a psychologist, there is a 95% chance they will say something along the lines of: "Ooooh I bet you can tell everything about a person by talking to them once". Well...I bet my dick could reach all the way down to your tonsils.

Truth is you can't unless there's a mystical eye growing out yer forehead and a good deal of psychologists should in no case be working in this field. The smugness and cynicism that some of my colleagues had in Uni...well yeah.

Also practicing psychologists, they should stop preaching and giving lectures to friends about how to lead a better life. I swear to god, it's an occupational disease. I mad

>>1119607
he's also 13 years old guys don't forget that

>>1119618
Don't feed the trolls.

Just don't.

>>1119620
Wrong post quoted?

>>1119627
What age are you?

>>1119626
>>1119626

exactly, we did one lesson on dream interpretation Freud style and everyone was like "omg tell me your dreams...omg that means you're a peado"

when all the real students were just leaning evo, bio, behaviour approaches.
with some cognitive
to every thing.

>>1119624
Most people are stupid, and most people are religious. WHAT COULD THIS POSSIBLY MEAN?

Please, just shut the fuck up. It's almost as if you think you are an intellectual, but you actually are quite ignorant, thereby making your intellectualism pseudo.

"I don't eat meat because it's wrong."
"Is it wrong for a lion to eat a gazelle?"
"No because the lion doesn't realise what it's doing is wrong."
wat

>>1119632
Stop responding to obvious ad hominem trolls. It only encourages them

>>1119636
you better not be the same anon lecturing me for feeding them.

the chart is a troll image, it puts "agnostic" at the top.

>>1119637
why so wat. Our legal system operates in the same way. If someone kills another person, yet does not know that doing so is wrong, they can plead insanity and get a much lighter sentence.

>>1119599
I know that feel. We had to read Huck Finn in my AP class. We had a whole week to do it and I finish it in four days. The rest of the class whines and he pushes the due date for the reading back. Deal with it guise, its not that hard to read a book.

>>1119639
Yeah, actually I am. Sorry about that. My bad. I'm a sucker for religious debate. In my defense, I'm an atheist, and I feel that he gives skeptics of every kind a bad name.

>>1119632
Yeah that was meant for Capote. Older than 13 anyway.

>>1119638
i'm generally interested in his age but he never tells me. Don't think D&E likes me. maybe he takes it to seriously at times when we disagree...

>>1119647
*genuinely

>>1119020
a troll*

>>1119640
You's trollin'

>guy I know always tries to manipulate conversations into discussions about books he's read recently
>he has no sense of humor or personality to speak of
>his manner is seriously affected; it's like he's trying to emulate some character out of a book
>wears a scarf
>why are all lit enthusiasts like this?

>>1119674
Trolling troller who trolls.

>>1119683

This is exactly like the girl I described in:

>>1119319

It must be some kind of personality disorder.

Here is a pic of her.

>>1119411
>>> see this comment.
RAGE FUCKING HARD
>>> prepare extensive belittling retort.
>>> realise it's sarcasm.
everythingwentbetterthanexpected.jpg

>>1119691

>>girl

I imagined a melancholic beauty. ;_;

>>1119697

She tells me she is going to get a sex change operation next year.

Sorry bro.

>>1119691
lesbian?

is bi-sexuality really trendy at universities?

>>1119703

Yes, especially among humanities students.

Everyone there keeps saying "Have you ever considered that you might be bisexual?" etc.

Sometimes I think it's like they are deliberately over confident about their sexuality to try and disguise their gaping insecurities about sex, even going so far as to create mathematical percentages for their sexuality, "60% Lesbian" etc.

Personally I don't believe bisexuality exists.

>>1119711
>>> Implying most bisexuals aren't women
>>> Implying women aren't indecisive

Me: quietly sitting in class checking my homework, Atlas Shrugged on desk.
Him: "I'm reading Anthem."
Me: "Oh, do you like it?"
Him: "Yeah, it's kind of like 1984."
I then died a little inside, realizing that I would rather remain a female kissless virgin forever than continue a conversation with someone who thought Anthem was like 1984.

>>1119466
I hate people like that. People who can turn a baseline knowledge of Freud into an opinion on EVERYTHING.
>>1119599
This. Ill take Pseudo-Intellectuals over retards any day. Atleast Pseudo intellectuals TRY. I remember back in high school without fail no matter what school I went to, no matter what grade it was, there was allways that one guy who was not only and idiot but he was PROUD of it.

Like this one asshole in my math class who without fail EVERY SINGLE TIME we got a math assignment would scream at the top of his lungs at the teacher "I DONT KNOW HOW TO DO THIS! THIS IS STUPID."
Then when we had a test he would allways beg the teacher to help him, "WHATS THE ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION!!?"
I might also add that this guy got an A in the class.


Then there was another asshole, he was in my senior english class. Whenever we would get a new book/story "I HATE READING. THIS IS DUMB." This guy was particularly bad because whenever we had to do any assignment he would loudly announce to everyone what he was writing,

"FOR NUMBER THREE I PUT ''P-DIDDY' AS MY ANSWER AHAHAHAHAHA"

"IN THIS PART OF MY STORY THE GUY BECOMES A FAMOUS FOOTBALL PLAYER AND GETS THESE TWO AWESOME CARS."

He wasnt even talking to anyone he was just screaming it out for anyone who could hear him.

>>1119729
He didnt say it was good just that it was similar to 1984.
Theyre both dystopian books.
Or is Rand in her own genre now?

>>1119729
>considering someone as possibly datable just because they share a taste/read books
Also this post would make a pretty good troll thread.

Yes, but everything Ayn Rand writes (all her fiction, at least) is somewhat dystopian. And he did say that he liked it because it was like 1984. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Rand-worshipper or anything. Apart from the fact that he was trying the pretentious act of comparing one famous work of literature to another, he also overlooked the fact that Orwell and Rand's messages are incredibly dissimilar in most respects.

Group of friends talking about a book we've all read, two of my friends haven't read it and don't make a habit of reading, get mad, conversation goes onto some forum about speculation on some of the ideas in it one of mad friends comes out with a line that will stick with me for ever "why would you read about books lol?"

>>1119624

Why the deist hate? It's just a less fickle agnosticism to me. I think the clockmaker analogy to explain everything is pretty reasonable.

But yeah, theists and religiousfags suck.

>>1119624
anyone who volunteers, without being asked, that they're an atheist is likely to fall under my definition of pseudo-intellectual, because in doing say they belie a belief that being atheist is radical and edgy rather than simply rational.

---------
some additional criteria i use for identification of pseudo-intelllectuals:
- quotes /monty python and the search for the holy grail/ in poor impression of british english
- brags about their preference for some nonstandard method of coffee preparation, while spouting misconceptions about more standard methods (as if they're the first person on earth to have discovered a french press, and as if coffee prepared with a french press is objectively better than coffee prepared in a drip brewer)
- disdainful of anything with apparent youth or mainstream appeal (such as batman the animated series or the lord of the rings films) without being able to defend that position

will post more as they come to mind

pic unrelated

>>1120009
- parrots antidrug rhetoric about substances with which they haven't the slightest amount of first-hand experience. extra points if they drink or smoke cigarettes.

>>1120009
that being said, atheism has long been marginalized, and atheist have been discriminated against, so you shouldn't blame them for opening up lines of dialogue that have traditionally been silenced. it may be personally annoying, but it's a good thing.