/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11939429]

Should Americans be forced to read philosophy or be shot so that they may actually gain some critical thinking skills and not be retarded slaves?

[Anonymous No.11939468]

>>11939429
are you asking if an introductory philosophy course should become a standardized part of public school curricula? obviously, yes. I enrolled in my first philosophy course when I was a junior in high school because I attended a private school that had an elective course system, and I'd already taken three philosophy courses before I entered college (two through high school, one through a local state school). modern American public schools actively diminish capability for intelligence, but private schools generally understand the proper methods based in the philosophy of education.

[Anonymous No.11939485]

>>11939468
It would be nice, but it would never happen. Minority populations are already having enough of a difficult time with English courses as it is, so schools are too cucked to add more humanities courses for them to fail.

[Anonymous No.11939520]

>i read PHILOSOPHY so i'm not a retarded SLAVE like these npcs

[Anonymous No.11939523]

>>11939485

>blaming things on minorities yet again

Why don't Americans ever take an introspective look at the disease instead of the symptoms?

[Anonymous No.11939537]

>>11939468
The point of public education is to indoctrinate, not educate.

[Anonymous No.11939539]

>>11939429
Just cut to the chase and shoot all Americans.
World's problems = solved

[Anonymous No.11939547]

>>11939523
>Why don't Americans ever take an introspective look at the disease instead of the symptoms?

Myriad reasons. I believe many of us misinterpret the Declaration of Independence's promise of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" to mean the pursuit of constant joy. In other words, many, many Americans take not feeling bad as a human right. So when anyone implies someone ought to assume some personal responsibility toward societal ails, like men being mindful of how they treat women, they get pissed and kick back against the shame. Ironically, this constant anger is antithetical to the 'happy', Edenic life they're trying to preserve, even though it never existed to begin with.

[Anonymous No.11939550]

>>11939520
Generally a good advice to live by. Though I suppose they leave out the reading part.

[Anonymous No.11939552]

Are europeans just born with 0 self awareness?

[Anonymous No.11939553]

Should have to read the Gulag Archipelago trilogy to graduate high school so we can rid the world of communism

[Anonymous No.11939558]

>>11939429
I'm not so sure that's a good idea. Most introductory philosophy courses are very bad due to the teacher's obvious biased views. while this is forgivable as everyone has an opinion, covering a school of thought by just making a person read a fraction of a philosopher's work and then discussing it without context.

[Anonymous No.11939559]

>>11939552
Jung was right, there is a collective unconscious. It's heavily disturbed and traumatized by the last century.

[Anonymous No.11939572]

>>11939539

That's a hot take.

[Anonymous No.11939574]

>>11939547
No ones thinking about the Declaration of Independence when they let themselves to hedonism and vice. They just don’t see the utility or divinity in working towards a common good. It’s what happens with isolation and loss of religion in a communal sense. It’s happening in many 1st world countries.

[Anonymous No.11939610]

>>11939574
These notions aren't distinct, and there's a great deal of synchronicity at play within a national consciousness. Obviously, this boils down to a valuing of hyper-individualism over even the mildest form of collectivism. But that's not far enough to go with this analytic. We need to understand why this is the case. Obviously, the Declaration isn't the source of this. The genesis lies before, but where? I only meant to gesture towards it to point out an early celebration of America's national philosophy.

[Anonymous No.11939618]

>>11939547
if americans were mindful of the declaration of independence, surely they'd give "all men are created equal" as much thought as "the pursuit of happiness?" the fact is, most americans don't think about the declaration of independence. nor do they think about the constitution aside from the select two or three most popular clauses.

>So when anyone implies someone ought to assume some personal responsibility toward societal ails, like men being mindful of how they treat women, they get pissed and kick back against the shame.

these problems are rarely broached respectfully. americans love conflict, kind of like the romans and their ampitheatres. but in a post-humanist society, slaughtering animals and your fellow men in an arena is considered barbaric. more "humane" conflicts are sought out which is where we get grand spectacles like world star or all of those talk shows where the dregs of society fight over who's the baby mama.

9 times out of 10, "be mindful of how you treat women" will be taken antagonistically because it's presented antagonistically, not constructively.

[Anonymous No.11939629]

>>11939539
Cute.

[Anonymous No.11939648]

>>11939618
>9 times out of 10, "be mindful of how you treat women" will be taken antagonistically because it's presented antagonistically, not constructively.

Briefly, I'd like to claim that "all men are created equal" was never believed by the majority of the Framers. Therefore it's proven to have been more of a show clause than something substantive. I did not mean to imply the primacy of the Declaration in the conscience of Americans, only to illustrate that it serves as a formal indication toward much of what modern Americans live their lives by. Although your points are well taken, I have to disagree with this last bit. I've known many American men, including my own brother, who take treating women respectfully as an antagonism without any prompting. They might look at the phrase "respecting women", and immediately have a bad taste in their mouths. They hear, or read, it as an accusation no matter how benignly it's delivered. It's deeper than simple antagonistic rhetoric.