/lit/ - Literature

>>17568283
Here's an example of a peak midwit. A literal fucking chad.

How do I become more Laconic? I'm thinking the Feynman method of memorizing a work than summarizing it in a denser form would be ideal.

Thoughts?

>>15745750

>>15645548
You learn math and science if you want to do that. Philosophers are chasing ghosts that they made up to jerk off ovver their slow brains that were too dumb for math.

Post more STEMlords BTFOing philosophy

>My son is taking a course in philosophy, and last night we were looking at something by Spinoza – and there was the most childish reasoning! There were all these Attributes, and Substances, all this meaningless chewing around, and we started to laugh. Now, how could we do that? Here’s this great Dutch philosopher, and we’re laughing at him. It’s because there was no excuse for it! In that same period there was Newton, there was Harvey studying the circulation of blood, there were people with methods of analysis by which progress was being made! You can take every one of Spinoza’s propositions, and take the contrary propositions, and look at the world – and you can’t tell which is right.

/sci/ here, what is the point of philosophy? it all seems like a bunch of unfalsifiable opinions that philosophers pulled out of thin air and each one of them contradicting each other while in Science/Maths it's a huge collaboration effort based on hard facts working off each other. Are there any philosophers at all that worked off an objective base like numbers?
Not trying to be offensive to liberal arts students here, just trying to understand the point
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8aWBcPVPMo

Describe one way that reading a metaphysics text could inform one more about the nature of reality than reading a text on, say, relativity or quantum physics.