/lit/ - Literature

>>18198386
What could you mean by this? It is true. Perhaps you don't agree with it merely because you don't fall under the category of a non-secular person, so I'll restructure the arguments in a way that perhaps would better suit you.

>More people would be smarter if they read philosophy!
Yet philosophy is, if not, one of the most unread genres of books. So people remain unaware and don't think critically.
>More people would get paid more if they graduated with a degree!
It's true, yet a lot of people drop out and complain that they aren't millionaires.
>If I obtain a discipline of eating right and working out, I will not only feel better but look better as well!
Of course, there is no lie here. Yet people don't as they do not have the discipline to continue physical activity, or making the right choices when it comes to their nutrition. Usually, it is met with excuses and resentment instead.


These are but some examples, but I'm sure you get the idea. Some choices will have an obvious effect if done, and usually for the better. The ad-hominems on your part only prove true of the statement implied previously. If one were to read Aquinas with an open heart, they will be susceptible to be moved and have their ideas changed, and vice versa to any books that are of different religions or against the notion entirely.

The difference with someone like you, and please correct me if I am wrong, is that you come in angry and bitter. Unable to even pretend to be open to the ideas of literature. And if you close yourself off like that, you will quickly find yourself denying everyone that does not have the same view as you. You cannot live in a reality that only has the same belief as you do, as that reality does not exist.