Turned this into a list without OP’s negative framing on them If people genuinely want to look it up later without a negative framing
Because I see no reason to frame them negatively like op has done as these topics are not inherently negative unlike OP’s negative bias of them
And bigots using them doesn’t make them Inherently negative either
- Correlation does not equal causation
- Language shapes thought
- Artificial intelligence
- Stanford prison experiment
- Iambic pentameter
- Schrodinger’s cat
- Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence
- Biblically accurate angels
- What if we live in a simulation ?
- Video essay
- Nuance
- Plato’s cave
- Infographics
- Linguistic prescriptivism
Edit: unnoticed typo
Yeah these fuckin nerds are using logic and thought to understand the world.
Just so I understand this correctly, is this a post mocking 20-something year olds by showing topics they believe to be niche, complex, or exclusive to an intelligent audience? And that by understanding these topics they are “propped up” compared to their peers?
I mean, a lot of these things are good things to consider/know about. For example, you do always have to consider that correlation is not necessarily causation. They’re not really considering the most deep of philosophy, but thinking is generally better than not thinking.
I bet OP thinks that Ben Shapiro qualifies as “thinker”
deleted by creator
Maybe I’m a dork, but I think“correlation does not equal causation” is actually a good thing to keep in mind.
I’m reminded of it every time a news story says something is “linked” to something else. I hate it when the word “linked” is used in this way. It’s often lazy journalism and/or a scare tactic. Saying that two things are “linked” implies a stronger relationship than may actually exist. I find it deliberately misleading.
Almost everything on the picture is a good thing to keep in mind. But the creator of the meme depicted it as a thought of a soyjack so there is nothing can be done, we now should abandon that logic entirely.
lol this is so painfully accurate, especially in internet culture where people feel inadequate in real life so they spend their time online wielding their swords of intellect.
I think it’s funny that you’re salty about people having philosophical discussions on the internet. It’s not just for being advertised to and jerkin it.
I’m salty about pseudointellectualism, not real intellectualism. The current format of short post communication on the internet is just not conducive to intellectual discussion.
Do they have /c/iamverysmart here?
Mmmk child
And there’s coup de grace of the iamverysmart, some sort of dismissive insult calling the person immature/child/buddy.
You forgot “logic” and “mushrooms” 🙄
Those people are in their 30s now lol
