/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.1578259]

I study engineering.

No one on my course reads.
No has opinions on politics or ethics
No one questions critically.
A shocking number go to church.
I try to engage them in debates and its like talking to my cat.

*sigh* I thought university was meant to place of education. To these guys its a place of skill-building aimed at employers.

Is it different elsewhere? (I'm in the UK)

[Anonymous No.1578262]

I too am a disillusioned UK engineer.

If you want something really depressing, it's all aimed at employment even in the soft subjects. Shit does suck though.

[Anonymous No.1578265]

It is not. Humans all take a different path.

Begin studying the classics and you'll find many who will want to converse with you.

[Anonymous No.1578267]

>I try to engage them in debates
This is not how you make friends. Don't try to debate them. Offer them a stick of gum. Ask them if they want to go for coffee. See if anyone wants to form a study group for the next exam.

Once you know people better you can start to pry into their personal beliefs and go all batshit forcing your ideas onto them if you want. Just don't do it up front.

[Anonymous No.1578273]

>>1578267
I think that's OP's point. I found sixth form to be more like how I envisioned university when it come to exploring ideas.

[Anonymous No.1578274]

>>1578267
>>1578267

They are already my friends. I don't need help making friends, thanks. It's never been a problem.

My point was that they seem wholly disinterested in anything that won't get them a passing grade or get them drunk.

[Anonymous No.1578275]

I was a Classics major (Latin and Greek, all texts original; not class. civ. - took that as an extra).

mfw when a fellow student - smart guy - hears me talking about something outside the course (ages ago; don't recall what), and says, "You actually have opinions on things?"

Saging because this isn't really /lit/erature.

[Anonymous No.1578276]

>>1578259

Welcome to market-based education.
Traditionally leftist countries like Spain, France or others are not like that.

[Anonymous No.1578280]

>mfw I was telling a second year philosophy student about Slavoj Zizek last Saturday

[Anonymous No.1578287]

>>1578276
>Spain, France
>Traditionally leftist

>Spain, France
>not market-based education

[Anonymous No.1578291]

>>1578287

When University is free and public, it's de facto not market based.

I understand that degrees that do not cost 150 000 USD is a hard concept for some people.

[Anonymous No.1578297]

>>1578291
>universities free
>France, Spain
I know this is a hard concept

[Anonymous No.1578299]

>>1578297

Your point?
University is free there.

[Anonymous No.1578302]

>>1578299
Except it's not. In Ireland you'd be right.

[Anonymous No.1578305]

>>1578274
>My point was that they seem wholly disinterested in anything that won't get them a passing grade or get them drunk.

Getting drunk is much more fun when you're opinionated and normally hold back.

[Anonymous No.1578307]

>>1578302

Herp derp.

So you're saying that I committed fraud by not paying anything for my French 5 year degree.

Damn.

Try to know of what you speak of, kid.

[Anonymous No.1578308]

>No has
>and its like
>was meant to place of education

[Anonymous No.1578310]

>>1578307
>>1578307
>>1578307

You didn't say where "here" was, moron.
We were talking about the UK.

[Anonymous No.1578311]

>>1578307
And in Germany it costs nothing if I'm German and have so many siblings.

For me, it wouldn't be.

[Anonymous No.1578312]

>>1578310

France and Spain =/= UK.

Your reading isn't that good.

[Anonymous No.1578314]

>>1578307
French degree? No wonder it was free

[Anonymous No.1578316]

>>1578314

Astrophysics actually, but given in France.

[Anonymous No.1578317]

OP it is meant to be. It is meant to be a place of learning for learning's sake, a place where knowledge is valued for its own sake, where virtue is cultivated, where sages and their pupils gather, or something like that.

It's become a job training factory. The best uni in my state/country, which I attend, suffered a sad fate something like what I described above.

There are the few people left who actually care about learning, knowledge and all the rest of it but they're very few.

But you can do something! Complain, gather people of a like mind, write letters to the deans, chancellor, etc.
Maybe it won't accomplish anything, but better than doing nothing, really.

[Anonymous No.1578331]

>>1578317

OP here.

FEELS BAD MAN

The funny thing is, I get ONE free subject to choose from, and we were told it had to be from the Engineering department. Of which there was one course.

FUCK.

[Anonymous No.1578336]

Maybe if the quality of academics was above copy pasting popular opinion and for example encouraged original thought and valued it above holding the right opinion, I'd give a fuck.

[Anonymous No.1578338]

>>1578302
Frenchfag here. It IS free.

[Anonymous No.1578340]

>>1578338
>...it IS free for Frenchfags
fix'd

[Anonymous No.1578381]

Finn with the same sentiments reporting in.

[Anonymous No.1578384]

>>1578340

Nope, free for foreigners as well.

[Anonymous No.1578391]

UNIVERSITY!

>Take the boring shits from school
>Put them in a university
>Same boring shits.

[Anonymous No.1578396]

>>1578259
The same in argentina. The engineering students here are a mix between /g/, /v/ and /b/.

(Computer engineering)

[Anonymous No.1578398]

>>1578396

> Argentina
> White

[Anonymous No.1578402]

>>1578398
of course

[Anonymous No.1578465]

Engineering is actually the #1 choice of Islamic terrorists. A surprising number hold degrees.

[Donne !!+SByMppsy+r No.1578516]

Eh, I have no real complaints about most of my fellow English undergraduates. Engineers and Psychology undergrads I know are either crazy or stupid to the point of wondering how the arse they got in to a good University.

[Anonymous No.1578523]

>>1578465

Maybe not that surprising, practically and psychologically: engineering
(1) provides technical skills related to such activities;
(2) requires an ability to focus on detail and the mechanics of tasks and things, so would match the psychological requirements for planning and carrying out a complex task like a bombing;
(3) has a focus on practical problems and how to solve them, and tends to see all problems as capable of practical solution given the right resources, skills, and techniques; and,
(4) is a discipline without any inherent ethical component (so those in it might be more likely to be looking outside their studies or work for ideas that cater to that, and so more likely to be open to recruitment by ideologues).

[Anonymous No.1578529]

>>1578465
The bomb makers who majored in philosophy never made it to the big time.

[Anonymous No.1578531]

>>1578523
>is a discipline without any inherent ethical component
Name a discipline that has an inherent ethical component without there being a parallel in Engineering

[Anonymous No.1578536]

>aspie neckbeard wants to leave engineering because strangers don't want to debate him
Just as planned, enjoy him lib art friends.

[Anonymous No.1578539]

Currently serving as an Engineer with the RAF

Spend my days with fucking retards who do nothing but play xbox and go clubbing

arseholes

[Anonymous No.1578544]

>>1578523
>>1578523
http://www.nspe.org/Ethics/CodeofEthics/index.html

>no ethical component
>every engineering society has a specific code of ethics

[Anonymous No.1578548]

>>1578317
>It's become a job training factory.

Or, seen another way, it's gone back to that. Universities began mainly as training schools for clergy (in the Christian world), religious scholars (in the Islamic), and teachers (a Master's degree being originally a certification to teach at a university). Disciplines like law developed alongside or as an offshoot of these, while what are now the humanities (philosophy, history, languages, etc.) are really just specializations of the same broad concerns, as are the "hard" sciences (mathematics, physics, life sciences) which developed from philosophical speculation.

Gradually, universities became places with three main types of student: prospective clergy, members of the professions (teachers, lawyers, doctors, civil servants), and sons of aristocrats. The last were the group who really encouraged the "learning for learning's sake" idea; the others were studying for their future jobs. Later still, other disciplines began to professionalize (esp. accounting and business), and universities began to educate people who would previously have learned by apprenticeship (architects, musicians and artists). So, universities have gradually come to be all-purpose certification institutions, while the opening up of them to new disciplines and especially after WW2 to people who would not previously have gone has inevitably greated greater pressure to teach marketable skills, and detracted from the "disinterested pursuit of knowledge" concept.

[Anonymous No.1578568]

>A shocking number go to church.

OP, I don't see how this is a problem.

[Anonymous No.1578577]

>>1578544

First off, that was my fourth point, AFTER noting the practical skills and habits of mind engineers require that might also be useful to terrorists. Humanities disciplines, law, pure mathematics, etc., don't teach such skills.

Second, you're using "ethics" in a difference sense from what I was, to mean a code of conduct that is imposed to circumscribe the practice of engineering and does not arise from the discipline of engineering itself. What I meant was that engineering (like several other technical disciplines) does not have or teach an inherent or implicit morality or worldview (the way medicine, say, implies that preserving life is a good thing; or the humanities imply that studying and understanding other people, and preserving culture, is inherently valuable); it's primarily a practical and mechanical discipline.

I am NOT arguing that engineers are bad people, dishonest, or inherently amoral. That would be ridiculous. Just seems to me that engineers might make good terrorist recruits primarily because of practical skills, and secondarily because theirs is a discipline less likely than some to be satisfying in what might loosely be called a "spiritual" or "philosophical" way, and so more likely to have members who look for those things elsewhere.

[Anonymous No.1578580]

>>1578568

I (not OP) don't either; but anecdotal and statistical evidence does suggest that there may be an inverse relationship between religious observance and level of tertiary education (at least below very advanced levels - there it seems the numbers even up again).

[♥onionring♥ !Rrxa7zePwI No.1578581]

go to columbia or cornell and it'll be better.

[Anonymous No.1578582]

>>1578548
All of which is motivated by capitalism and all of which is destructive and evil.

Thank goodness I have received sufficient bursaries and scholarships and have sufficient familial wealth that I needn't worry about work or mingling with plebians and dirty common folk who aspire to such great things as counting money, filing papers, filling out forms, performing bureaucratic procedures, waking up at 7am and going to sleep tired and unfulfilled, etc., etc.

Thank god for that!

[Anonymous No.1578585]

>>1578577
A code of ethics is only one element. Try responding to >>1578531
It may be the fourth point, but it's no less retarded. In fact, most of those points are pretty dumb, showing fundamental misunderstandings of engineering (that, to be fair, are shared by many engineering undergrads, and even low level engineers). (1) is the only point that could make sense, but even then such a thing is outside most engineers knowledge.

[Anonymous No.1578596]

>>1578531
>Name a discipline that has an inherent ethical component without there being a parallel in Engineering

Humanities and social sciences in general imply that human beings are inherently worthwhile and valuable as a subject of study, that varieties of thought and ways of life are too; medicine implies that life is inherently worth preserving; law is predicated, if not on such nebulous and idealistic notions as justic, at least on the power of words and procedure to order society and achieve a desired end.

By contrast, disciplines like mathematics, physics, chemistry, and engineering are focussed primarily on understanding and exploiting a body of agreed knowledge, together with techniques and processes, to achieve desired ends. They are in many ways, at least at the levels of most students and practitioners, ideologically and philosophically neutral disciplines.

[Anonymous No.1578604]

>>1578585

Points (1) to (3) are all about the skills engineers might have. You say they don't have such skills. Could you elaborate? Don't engineers have to have detailed technical knowledge of their field? Don't they have to be able to design, plan, and put into effect processes to achieve specific goals; and so on?

Of course *most* engineers wouldn't know how to build bombs, etc., but *most* engineers are not terrorists. We are talking about the tiny percentage who are, and why among that tiny percentage of humanity, there might be a disproportionate number of engineers.

[Anonymous No.1578606]

>>1578596
>By contrast, disciplines like mathematics, physics, chemistry, and engineering are focussed primarily on understanding and exploiting a body of agreed knowledge, together with techniques and processes, to achieve desired ends. They are in many ways, at least at the levels of most students and practitioners, ideologically and philosophically neutral disciplines.
First of all, it is a fallacy to conflate the design based discipline of Engineering with science based disciplines. Medicine is closer to being a science in its practice (due to the role of semiotics) than Engineering is. While a science tries to understand what is already around us, engineering creates completely new structures/mechanisms/objects.

Secondly, the inherent ethics of the disciplines you mentioned are also applicable to engineering. Here's an example from civil engineering:
>Civil engineering is all about creating, improving and protecting the environment in which we live. It provides the facilities for day-to-day life and for transport and industry to go about its work.
From the ICE website. All other disciplines have similar statements.

In fact, you can't even talk about the other professions without engineering, since the infrastructure that allows medicine, law etc. to exist is based on engineering.

[Anonymous No.1578608]

>>1578302
>In Ireland you'd be right.

Ireland here.
Free education feels good, man.

[Anonymous No.1578615]

>>1578317
Absolutely agreed. I'd love to start a more traditional, albeit unacredited, university like the universities of the turn of the last century.

[Anonymous No.1578623]

>>1578604
Well, for (1), engineers all have specialisms. A mechanical engineer should realize they are probably unfit to talk about a specifically fire engineering problem, as much as a structural engineer will know they are also probably unfit to talk about an electronics problem. It is part of engineering to know what the bounds of your professional knowledge, and as such area, is. Most don't cover (1), though it's arguable there may be some skills that allow an engineer to more easily learn.

>(2) requires an ability to focus on detail and the mechanics of tasks and things, so would match the psychological requirements for planning and carrying out a complex task like a bombing;
Engineers always have to consider the environment into which their creation is placed. Engineering at such an abstract level is generally overly complicated and useless, it's important to remain based in reality. It's really not at all like the man in a room you shove equations under the door to.
>(3) has a focus on practical problems and how to solve them, and tends to see all problems as capable of practical solution given the right resources, skills, and techniques
All engineers should know that engineering designs are only possible within certain constraints. The last thing like this to die off was the "if you throw enough money at it it will happen" mindset, which is tripe (projects have an appropriate size, area and purview. Going outside these tends to leads to inefficiency in the project and/or a project that will make things worse).

[Anonymous No.1578626]

>>1578259

Turkishfag here. It's even worse here.

[Anonymous No.1578632]

>>1578606

I'm conflating nothing. I didn't say that engineering was inherently like the sciences I mentioned in content or method; only that they are all disciplines that are, to a significant degree, inherently "ideologically and philosophically neutral".

>Civil engineering is all about creating, improving and protecting the environment in which we live. It provides the facilities for day-to-day life and for transport and industry to go about its work.

This is essentially a slogan. And it doesn't get to my point. Which is that engineering *per se* - that is, the discipline without any marketing, professional codes, etc. - is not moral or immoral, but amoral: its concern is principally with designing and creating tools or objects to fulfil specific requirements. If you want to design an efficient dialysis machine or bomb shelter, you're going to need engineering; if you want to design an efficient bomb or gas chamber, you're going to need engineering. The discipline *itself* does not distinguish *inherently* among those tools: all are at base problems of design and function, to which the right engineers will be equipped to create solutions. Of course, human beings working in the discipline and running professional bodies *do* very much have moral views, and that is why they impose rules of conduct, safety standards, and so on. But those views and rules arise from the general ethical sense of human beings and the demands of society; not from engineering as a discipline.

[Anonymous No.1578645]

>>1578623

I don't see how any of what you say is at odds with what I did. A successful terrorist in the real world (as opposed to a James Bond film, for example) is a person who aims to carry out a specific, practically achievable act, the resources, funds, and tools to achieve which are within the realms of possibility. Lets say he wants to build a bomb to attack a specific building. He needs to design and make something that will have the desired explosive effect (whether he wants to cause structural damage or merely a lot of flame and smoke), that will not be impossible to place (too heavy, too large, too obvious), and that will not blow up (wrong materials) or arouse suspicion in advance (i. e., will get through security measures, will use materials that won't be flagged up). Those, it seems to me, are all engineering challenges, that engineers of the right sort would be able to solve. Again, we're not talking about *all* engineers, or engineers in general; we're talking about a tiny number and proportion of people, who have a motive to make themselves specialists in the area they're working in.

[a pedo !17z98If2E6 No.1578647]

>Is it different elsewhere?

AFAIK, yes. i study maths, and the level of political commitment is surprising. im from argentina btw. Usually, maths students are not your stereotypical 'nerd', but people with actual intelligence.

[Anonymous No.1578651]

>attending Madison College
>ask fellow students what they think about Governor Walker's budget bill
>they don't know wtf I'm talking about
>mfw when my international online friends knew more about Madison politics than my classmates

Granted, this was last Tuesday, which was before the protests completely exploded. It had been announced the Friday before though, and made a few headlines. That's probably what I get for going to a 2-year college though, the university was already mobilizing protests and counter-protests.

[Anonymous No.1578662]

>>1578651
this is quite surprising, it'd be next to impossible to find anyone today who hasn't at least heard of the thing

we are an extremely jock school though, most of the students don't give a single flying fuck about any of the classes they take (communications major lolz) and most of the time they are thinking about getting back to the gym

that's not a bad thing imo

[Anonymous No.1578697]

>>1578662
You a fellow Madison College student? Howdy there.

>this is quite surprising, it'd be next to impossible to find anyone today who hasn't at least heard of the thing
Yeah. Well, like I said it was early last week, the protests didn't started breaking records until later that afternoon. Still, it had been in the news over the weekend.

>we are an extremely jock school though, most of the students don't give a single flying fuck about any of the classes they take (communications major lolz) and most of the time they are thinking about getting back to the gym
Not my program so much. I'm in Judicial Reporting. I'd say about four my fellows are adults who are switching careers, then there's two younger girls and faggoty old me. (Small class, used to be bigger but the drop out rate is ridiculous due to difficulty.) They take it pretty seriously. Don't read the paper though, I guess.

[Anonymous No.1578761]

>NOBODY HAS OPINIONS THEREFORE I CAN'T SHARE MINE AND DEFEAT THEIRS.

OP the world is apathetic. Humanity is apathetic. You should be apathetic as well.

Embrace the simulacrum.

[Anonymous No.1578770]

become cynical and nihilist like the rest of us

[Anonymous No.1578773]

>>1578259

I do a split degree, half film studies, half literature, also in the UK, and it's frustrating because everyone who does straight literature is much more critically intelligent, engaged with politics on some level, and at least pro-intellectual if not actually particularly intelligent rather than proudly anti-intellectual etc.

Then most people in the film half of the course are basically the opposite, in-fact just like the engineering students you describe, only much worse because they get it into their head that film studies is completely worthless (as though critically studying culture and the impact it can have on us in a society which is so pervasively saturated with it isn't important) so they have this massive semi-ironic self-depricating inferiority complex on top of all the other bullshit and it just makes me want to smash their stupid faces in every seminar.

[Caveat Emptor !!k5UN6GMsHtW No.1578784]

I was an engineering student for 3 years in Florida-USA, and honestly, a lot of kids are there because it's a "good" degree that pays well when you graduate, not because they are passionate about it.

Now some do like the subject matter. But the number of engineers that I met that resented the high paying yet low vacation day providing jobs was a little unsettling. By the end of my three years, the classes I took and the people I met kinda provided incentive for me to seriously considering whether I was really doing it for the right reasons myself.

I find that you've often got to seek out people who spend most of their time thinking. It's hard to find--especially among students-- those who are more interested in developing themselves as people and not only shooting pool, getting drunk, chasing tail, or smoking dope. Not to say that I didn't do my fair share of those things while I was in school.

Student Organizations devoted to debate and Philosophy may be your best bet. To be honest, the way in which I've met the most interesting people was through working a job at a restaurant through college. The ones I preferred catered to more than a select group of people, and were comfortable places to have a conversation in. By expanding your pool of potential conversationalists beyond your major, you'll meet a very large number of people in all kinds of fields and get a handful of perspectives on life, work, etc.

[Anonymous No.1578786]

I study Law.

No-one on my course reads.
No-one has opinions on politics or ethics.
No-one questions critically.
A shocking number of them goes to Church.
Cracking a homophobic joke is like saying hello.

The lesson: People are the same the world over/contemporary American culture encourages young people to become experts in their careers at the expense of becoming idiot savants.

[Anonymous No.1578787]

>>1578632
>>1578645
Then those points are so general as to make no sense. And accusations of sloganeering can be applied to any of your examples. In fact, that you cite law as an example of something inherently ethical is laughable in comparison (there is no fall back to justice).

So, you're right insofar as you can apply one rule to one discipline and to no others, which is at best ridiculous:
>I'm conflating nothing. I didn't say that engineering was inherently like the sciences I mentioned in content or method; only that they are all disciplines that are, to a significant degree, inherently "ideologically and philosophically neutral"
You're missing the ending from that of:
>because I said so, and no I cannot back this up, despite evidence to the contrary

[Anonymous No.1578792]

>>1578773
Where do you study? I've applied to do the same at a few Uni's starting this September/October.

[Caveat Emptor !!k5UN6GMsHtW No.1578793]

>>1578276
The reason why public institutions cater to engineering and medical science? Because they get grants that keep them afloat when the rest of the state's budget is floundering (46 are now in default now) . If they catered exclusively to Middle Ages History they wouldn't get the money they need to stay fucking open. And if you like Middle Ages history, you can find plenty of it, this "market-based economy" produced a wealth of knowledge accessible to your fingertips at this very moment.

For Christssakes. You're responsible for your own education, and if you or your kid don't seek it out (either recreationally or through a school tailored to the education you're looking for), it's not your right to reach into your neighbors pocket for more money because you don't want to pay for these things yourself. It's not even a cost issue if you have the incentive and know where the goddamn library is.

Jesus, what a weak criticism. I feel as though I've been trolled.

[Anonymous No.1578816]

I hail from Canada, and before going to University we're all required to get a basic literature and philosophy training.

It weeds out a lot of the zombies, but neo-liberal dickheads still get through by playing along with the teacher, and it has an adverse result in the fact that most of Quebec society hates educated people.

[Anonymous No.1578828]

Hey OP, join one of the societies or something.

[Anonymous No.1578835]

I study philosophy

No one on my course reads
No one has anything but simple opinions on politics and ethics
No one questions critically unless forced to (except in my logic group which does)
A shocking number of people go to church generally at my university
I try engaging them in debates to varying success.

It's not a course thing, OP. I'm from the UK too. It's just a general student attitude.

Btw, going to church isn't a sign of idiocy but just of a certain background: those from a upper-middle class background that is.

[The Master !oKVZQzhloE No.1578837]

What's wrong with going to church?

[The Master !oKVZQzhloE No.1578840]

>>1578835

>going to church isn't a sign of idiocy but just of a certain background: those from a upper-middle class background that is.

lol no

[Anonymous No.1578843]

>>1578840

Everyone I know at university who goes to church are upper-middle class people who grew up in the countryside rather than cities. Or they are international students.

If your complaint, however, is that church is not a sign of idiocy then you are being silly. Belief in God is not a logical matter but an emotional one and you cannot challenge someone's intellectual capabilities on an emotional matter.

[♥onionring♥ !Rrxa7zePwI No.1578847]

>>1578843
emotional matters can distort reasoning capacity.

[The Master !oKVZQzhloE No.1578848]

>>1578843

>Everyone I know at university who goes to church are upper-middle class people

Well everyone I know likes peanuts. Therefore everybody likes peanuts. Sweet logic there. If anything poor people are by far the majority of church going folk in the world.

[♥onionring♥ !Rrxa7zePwI No.1578856]

>>1578847
not that belief in god is "an emotional matter"

it's more complicated, but under ideal reasoning (ideal thinker) there is a fact of the matter about whether religions are true or not

[Anonymous No.1578860]

>>1578843
>belief in god is not a logical matter
the vast majority of philosophical history disagrees with you.

[Anonymous No.1578874]

University education in Ireland isn't free.

If it was I'd go south instantly.

[Anonymous No.1578876]

>>1578860
Yes but you have to distinguish the existence of a God from the belief in it: I am referring to the second.

You do not convert an individual by logical reasoning, faith in God is not some intellectual matter like a scientific theory that someone says 'ah, true based on evidence': your faith in it is based off an emotional connection and it is only by breaking that (logical reasoning against it helps) that someone stops believing in God. This is why people may continue to believe in God despite amble evidence against it and even they themselves are aware of the power of the evidence.

Ask any figure converted from religion to atheism in history and you will find them all stating that it is an emotional thing, you do not stop your belief because of logic. And yes, you can find memoirs of such individuals stating this.

I completely agree that the existence of a God is a logical matter, just not people's belief in it.

>>1578848

True. But I am talking from an isolated part of the world. It is true that things differ elsewhere but from talking to other students at other universities they all agree that the same demographic here are church-goers. It may differ elsewhere in the world completely.

>>1578847

Again, true, as I've mentioned above. But that does not make someone ignorant or stupid. There are many intellectual geniuses who believe in a God and many more people completely driven by love or some emotion. It may affect behaviour or even reasoning but that doesn't make them stupid: they could otherwise reason perfectly well.

[♥onionring♥ !Rrxa7zePwI No.1578881]

>>1578876
>that doesn't make them stupid
of course not
>they could otherwise reason perfectly well.
but when they reason about god they are reasoning badly.

[Deep&Edgy !pSkjEcB9sQ No.1578884]

>>1578856
>ideal reasoning

funny Enlightenment Thinker impression onion

[Anonymous No.1578886]

>>1578276
>Traditionally leftist countries like Spain
Well, I'm in my last year of HS (i know, hurr durr you're too young) and I have several friends at uni. None of them has opinions on ethics, politics or reads shit (btw they all study engineering, chemistry, physics and science-related careers)
Also
>Spain
>leftist
lolno

[Anonymous No.1578887]

>>1578881

that is because of their emotional attachment with precedes their logical self at that point. I've seen perfectly reasoned arguments for God but I don't believe in him. Nor do I find that individual stupid, I am just aware that in this area their emotional attachment is great enough to precede logic.

My point raised was that OP seems to suggest that because they attend church they are more stupid which is a completely ridiculous statement to make.

[♥onionring♥ !Rrxa7zePwI No.1578892]

>>1578884
it's actually a fairly recent development. i kind of like the whole idea around it.

[♥onionring♥ !Rrxa7zePwI No.1578895]

>>1578887
> I've seen perfectly reasoned arguments for God
well, if you revise this belief into
"i've seen seemingly reasonable arguments for God that actually do not work" then we'd be okay

[Anonymous No.1578904]

>>1578895

Alright, I was just saying belief in a God is not a sign of mental inferiority but emotional background ultimately.

[Anonymous No.1578940]

Where are these smart philosophy/politics students?

The vast majority I met are pretentious fuckers who try to pass off as well-read, but are too stupid to do anything let alone a science.

Science kids on the other hand, are well-read, intelligent and have a good sense of everything around them.

For example, my trivia teams in highschool and university are science kids, whereas I'm the only humanities kid.

[Anonymous No.1578967]

> Thanks for your request.
It has been added to our database and the thread will be archived as soon as enough request for that thread have been made.
This thread has been requested 1 times now


I have seen some wonderful discussion in this thread.

[Anonymous No.1578986]

>>1578940

my experience is this:
Humanities and arts (I am one of these) are lazy and unpassionate.
Sciences and maths are ignorant and unpassionate.
Film, media and so forth are actually informed and passionate about their subject.

But that's just my experience

[Anonymous No.1579004]

>>1578761
It's not that they don't agree with me, it's that they have no opinion. I've love for them to disagree, but they just gaup and drool.

>>1578837
going to church marries into the lack-of-opinion/don't-question/limit-critical-thought mentality of these guys

[Anonymous No.1579064]

>>1578876
you've created a false dichotomy for yourself there, friend. the existence of and belief in god are one and the same. challenging one is challenging the other; accepting one is accepting the other. and you're making a frankly wrong assertion to say that people do not adhere to the noble truths of a given religion due to logic, or leave a religion because of some emotional severance. in fact most atheists i know generally seem to couch their own beliefs in emotional terms [the self / ego versus god]. of course you can also find accounts / song lyrics / etc stating this as well.

[Anonymous No.1579083]

OMG ATHEISTS ARE SO CONDESCENDING SAGE SAGE SAGE

[Behemoth !!Twl3DmqEY/B No.1579118]

I'm in school to eventually transfer and do engineering to.

Here's what I've discovered:
People make blanket statements to justify their own emotional conclusions.

[Anonymous No.1579307]

>>1578835
Ludwig Wittgenstein works on religious/metaphysical type.

LawL --- Liberal Education is weerzitzat http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2008/sep/20/fiction