1249
1250

I want to believe this is parody (i.redd.it)

leekhead が 投稿

全 115 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]Baby-exDannyBoy 310ポイント311ポイント  (17子コメント)

knowledge is a physical medium of comunication

No, that's what a cellphone is.

[–]cantgetno197 30ポイント31ポイント  (8子コメント)

I thought the medium was the message???

[–]brzztffn 48ポイント49ポイント  (6子コメント)

I always thought that medium was a way of expression, or a middle man of some action.

For example a medium in art, would be clay. Because that was the thing the artist used to express the piece. In fact the material used to construct a piece is called a medium--or at least it is in my overpriced textbook--.

A cellphone would be a medium of communication because people use it to transmit what they are saying to one another.

But what do I know? I only have an iq of 134, 4 doctorates degrees (working on my fifth), and a full time job making 450,000 a year. All at the age of 18.

[–]feastywheats 19ポイント20ポイント  (2子コメント)

everyone claps and gets a shot of latte

[–]ortfs 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Your name? Albert Einstein

[–]Sliver1002 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

I think talking is the medium, while cell phones are a tool to help talking.

[–]Xoxo717 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

The air would be the medium when talking. The phone would be the medium on the phone. Just like in science class: the medium is what the wave travels through.

[–]TheRealScatManJohn 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Clearly he didnt get the message

[–]Crowbarmagic 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

He typed it with a capital K. Maybe it's a new phone, the LG Knowledge.

[–]kalabash 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

knowlEdge. They'll do something fancy with it

[–]moistowelettes 5ポイント6ポイント  (3子コメント)

Pastor says God created cell phones to become a physical knowledge of mediums. ;)

[–]Cleb044 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

MY DAD IS NOT A CELLPHONE I THREW IT ON THE GROUND

[–]Mudfist 33ポイント34ポイント  (0子コメント)

Well, he was right. He doesn't know shit. Gotta give him that...

[–]justaskingforasecond 137ポイント138ポイント  (25子コメント)

The Cynics and the Rhetorics? Are they like some kind of peoples?

[–]Charles-the-Cat 131ポイント132ポイント  (5子コメント)

Ivy League basketball teams.

[–]Zubalo 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

Can confirm. Cousin coaches ivy league basketball

[–]omniaunusest 18ポイント19ポイント  (1子コメント)

/thread

[–]Solracziad 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Seriously. Pack it in, boys. We've already peaked.

[–]s-to-the-am 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

I bet the Cynics suffer from a lot of confirmation bias.

[–]Warhawk137 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

The Rhetorics certainly talk a big game.

[–]TrekkiMonstr 60ポイント61ポイント  (13子コメント)

I don't think the "Rhetorics" exist (to the best of my knowledge). The second guy was just referring to the rhetoric of the Classical Greek philosophers.

The Cynics, however, were a legit philosophical school. They believed in asceticism, not needing worldy things, that sort of thing. They were an offshoot of Socrates; the first guy to lay out their philosophy was a student of Socrates. That guy's student was a guy named Diogenes, probably one of the most famous cynics. He lived basically only with the clothes on his bath, and he lived in a bathtub on the streets of Athens.

From online: "the purpose of life is to live a life of Virtue in agreement with Nature (which calls for only the bare necessities required for existence)."

Modern "cynicism" is very different from ancient Cynicism. Everyone kinda forgot about it for a while, and modern day cynicism is a lot more about rejecting regular life than living in a bathtub in Athens.

Fun story about Diogenes: Alexander the Great went to Athens to hear the great philosopher Diogenes. He came up to Diogenes and asked if there was anything he could do for the man. Diogenes' reply? "Step out of my light."

[–]THANE_OF_ANN_ARBOR 36ポイント37ポイント  (4子コメント)

He meant to say "sophists," not "rhetorics." I'm guessing he just didn't know the right word for the school/movement.

[–]Vicvic38 14ポイント15ポイント  (0子コメント)

Diogenes was the OG. He just did whatever the fuck he wanted.

Whatever. Seriously.

[–]PimpBoyLafferty 13ポイント14ポイント  (0子コメント)

Diogenes was also known to masturbate in public. Pretty cool guy IMO.

[–]I_Conquer 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

I believe you mean "the clothes on his back*"?

[–]feastywheats 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

Nah man, his bath needed the clothes more than him.

His bath was the love of his life, of whom he supported

[–]TrekkiMonstr 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Close enough

[–]Spambop 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

the purpose of life is to live a life of Virtue in agreement with Nature (which calls for only the bare necessities required for existence

Easy to say when you live in a hot country

[–]EmeraldFlight 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

(they were pretty goooood)

[–]blaz1120 -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

You also forgot that diogenes was very poor and lived in a barrel. Alexander said that they are the only two men that have everything they want. It was something like that I think

[–]Smith_And_The_Ereens 9ポイント10ポイント  (0子コメント)

Is this a cynical kind of rhetorical statement kind of thing? I think you don't know how well trained these youth of today are in the classical way of eruditing stuff.

[–]Vril_Dox_2 9ポイント10ポイント  (0子コメント)

I might be outing myself as pretentious here, but the ancient greek cynics were pretty punk-rock. The greek word cynic means to live like a dog. These dudes were like the original crust punks.

The rhetoricians seem pretty cool too. I love Lucian's True History. But that's mostly because it has bitchin' monsters. Also, I thought he was a cynic too.

[–]niftypotatoe 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Cynics are. School of Greek thought. Basically extremist stoics. I've never heard of the "Rhetorics" though

[–]Tietonz 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm pretty positive it's not a dichotomy.

[–]ofsinope -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Cynics were a group of ancient philosophers. Rhetorics are not a group of people that I've ever heard of...

[–]0DegreesCalvin 41ポイント42ポイント  (13子コメント)

If you don't know anything, how do you know that you don't know anything?

[–]pixel_pete 28ポイント29ポイント  (1子コメント)

Eric told me and he's pretty spot on about that kind of stuff.

[–]danhardcore 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

So now you know something. :V

[–]killeronthecorner 15ポイント16ポイント  (0子コメント)

Cool it Jayden.

[–]Klums2 6ポイント7ポイント  (6子コメント)

I think he was trying to reference Socrates in The Apology by Plato. Socrates says he's the wisest because he knows that he knows nothing. This of course isn't meant to be taken at face value, which is what that person appears to have done

[–]0DegreesCalvin 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

It is impossible to know that you know nothing, because knowing that is knowing something.

[–]Klums2 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

I am aware. That's why I said it shouldn't be taken at face value. The person in OPs screenshot either doesn't understand the irony or thinks that they're superior for knowing something you learn in the first two weeks of philosophy 101

[–]zalos 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I never took a philosophy class and in high school I was reading Socrates and when I got to that part I thought it was the deepest shit I had ever heard. Luckily facebook wasn't a huge thing or I may have had posted a few embarrassing things about it.

[–]Darkcool123X 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

Socrates never said he was the wisest himself. The oracle of Delphi was asked by a friend of Socrates if he anyone was wiser than him and he said no. Socrates then tried to find out if the oracle was wrong because he didn't think himself as the wisest. But everything else you said is right. Pretty sure that guy just read the Apology by Plato and now thinks he's superior to everyone else lol.

[–]Klums2 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

You're right. I was mostly just trying to summarize but IIRC he concludes that the Oracle said that because Socrates knows he knows nothing. But either way it's about the philosophical equivalent of learning about x in algebra class

[–]Darkcool123X 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah it's ok, I just wanted to clarify anyways because it really matters when defining Socrates as a person!

[–]s2514 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I don't know...

[–]DannyFuckingCarey 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

🎶 "All I know is that I don't know nothing..." 🎶

[–]sakkara 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Well technically saying I don't know anything could imply that you are not sure if you know anything.

[–]TheComebackPidgeon 12ポイント13ポイント  (0子コメント)

Not the best place to be serious, but this reminded me that a portuguese writer once said "I don't know anything about almost everything" and it is one of my favourite sentences ever.

[–]Pigzooka 47ポイント48ポイント  (28子コメント)

What is it with all these nihilists? It's not any more valid than any other philosophy. It's kind of like a philosophical Schrödinger's Cat.

[–]swifTsx3 44ポイント45ポイント  (3子コメント)

I'm a nihilist and that makes me even smarter than the atheists!

[–]Megareddit64 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

Dunno. I'm also a nihilist, but i think it got a little "trendy".

[–]pretentiousmusician 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Agreed. Too many people who don't actually understand nihilism use it for their own self-validation and give it a bad name

[–]FearLoathingHolland 28ポイント29ポイント  (9子コメント)

I'm a nihilist, but I really don't get why so many people seem to think that that makes you smart. It's just what I believe, that nothing has inherent value, and that we can therefore give value to whatever we want. Why on Earth that would make someone smarter than anyone else is beyond me.

[–]foyra 21ポイント22ポイント  (7子コメント)

So they give value to themselves. It's just like how the priests hoard all the communion cookies, every religion has an advantage

[–]FearLoathingHolland 4ポイント5ポイント  (5子コメント)

I think that it's just that it sounds cool or smart or something. Anyway, I just want to point out that nihilism isn't a religion, it's just believing nothing has objective value, that's it really.

[–]foyra 10ポイント11ポイント  (1子コメント)

Well I guess you didn't give much value to my Joke.

[–]Vicvic38 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

There are many forms of it, dude. It ranges from that to the disbelief in Morality and Purpose in life, which is what I subscribe to.

We create our own purpose, that's the beauty of it. And what is subjectively moral is what works towards that goal. No objective good or bad.

It's how I eat cake and not cry after.

[–]thesfg 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Also a Nihilist... Nihilism is often perceived as the rejection of everything, whereas for me, nihilism is more like the acceptance of nothing, "nothing" being the inevitability that everything will expire into nothingness. It's not cynicism, it's just to admit that I am ultimately powerless, and if I am not, I will be. But to define nihilism is a paradox, and I'm not saying I am right or wrong. I have to admit that nihilism is cringy, but it actually makes me feel better about coping with mistakes and actually makes me think very carefully about my actions and my future. There is no redemption, only the continuation of what I may or may not be. And for some reason I am just okay with that.

Not disagreeing with you or anything, I just really dig this comment chain and wanted to put in my $.02.

[–]FGHIK 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I just feel that's kind of like when people say no one truly does anything for charity, but for the good feeling it gives them. Like, maybe, but it just seems like nitpicking to take things to that level.

[–]dis_is_my_account 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Communion cookies are delicious though. I'd hoard them too.

[–]sakkara 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

So that's why I should buy bitcoins?!

[–]LarryTheTerrier 22ポイント23ポイント  (5子コメント)

Nihilists! Fuck me. I mean, say what you want about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos.

[–]zbobby1990 0ポイント1ポイント  (4子コメント)

Not really sure what you're getting at here. Being a nihilist doesn't make you inherently smarter than anyone, but it's a valid way of thinking. Especially under the umbrella of absurdism and existentialism (where I fall, personally) which a lot of people lump in with nihilism.

[–]NukeWithG 11ポイント12ポイント  (2子コメント)

What he said was a reference.

[–]zbobby1990 26ポイント27ポイント  (1子コメント)

Sorry, I can't hear you on account of the whoosh noise over my head.

[–]FearLoathingHolland 11ポイント12ポイント  (0子コメント)

Just in case, it's from The Big Lebowski. Watch it, dude.

[–]ClashTenniShoes 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

Shut the fuck up Donnie!

[–]Baby-exDannyBoy 9ポイント10ポイント  (1子コメント)

Because it's easy to sound smart when you make everything look stupid. It's like getting into a discussion about Trump's election with the argument "whatever, democracy doesn't work".

[–]SickBoy88 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's also less scary than committing to something, because then someone can prove you wrong or at least argue with you.

[–]Vril_Dox_2 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

This is a troll right? Nihilism, its like philosophical quantum physics.

[–]Vicvic38 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's a stance and just like quantum physics there are the trendy "I've read 21 books on it therefore I'm an expert and better than all you people" and then there are the people who just genuinely know about it and understand how little they really know about it.

[–]pretentiousmusician 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Existentialism is the cool nihilism

[–]Xoxo717 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm confident that most "nihilists" don't know what nihilism even is.

[–]darthbarracuda 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

/r/badphilosophy

[–]duhhhhhderek 10ポイント11ポイント  (0子コメント)

Fucking God awful. God awful.

[–]JonnyRocks 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

Is this on facebook? (I haven't used it so sorry if its obvious) I just ask because I see lot of these verysmart people on facebook posts. Do they just wait for their friends to post something so they can share their verysmart thoughts on them?

[–]OMG_I_just_shat 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yes, it's Facebook. Yes, they probably do.

[–]RightCross4 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

I actually like that Oscar Wilde quote.

[–]sweetykitty 5ポイント6ポイント  (9子コメント)

Yeah, The Economist seems to attract these kinds of people.

[–]dedragon40 -4ポイント-3ポイント  (8子コメント)

How do you associate The Economist with pretentious morons? Please explain. If you had said any pop science paper instead, I'd agree. But now you're just making a sweeping statement that is very inaccurate.

[–]MurrayMcScurrilous 7ポイント8ポイント  (6子コメント)

Look at their advertising for the last thirty years. They have purposely positioned themselves as a magazine for smart people. Of course a few people are going to buy into that and take it a little too seriously.

[–]terminus-- 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Hey look, I made a relevant post two years ago!

[–]dedragon40 -1ポイント0ポイント  (4子コメント)

Could you provide examples of this advertising? If it's been that way in the last 30 years, there must be plenty of examples. And don't give me examples of advertising related to business or wealth.

[–]MurrayMcScurrilous 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

Business and wealth are intrinsically tied to their advertising though.

Wealth through savvy business practice is the end game for the smart economist reader. I mean it's called 'The Economist'

So no I won't be able to find examples that don't relate to business or wealth.

[–]dedragon40 -4ポイント-3ポイント  (2子コメント)

In other words, you completely misrepresented The Economist as a newspaper due to your personal opinions and the people who upvoted you are people who are unfamiliar with it and have probably never read it.

To say that discussion about business is smart is your personal opinion. As a newspaper, they have never made themselves out to be better than other newspapers. The people associating The Economist with intelligence do so because the writers are brilliant and smart people tend to enjoy this writing, however as a newspaper they've never been elitist or otherwise discriminatory towards non-businessmen.

[–]terminus-- 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Please see my above post to see an example of them directly targeting "intellectuals".

[–]MurrayMcScurrilous 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Just to be clear. I'm specifically talking about the advertising and not the publication itself. It's important not to confuse the two. One is made by the publishers. One is made by an external agency that is being paid to represent the publication (or misrepresent them, depending on your view of their campaigns).

And yes I am offering my opinion. About something as subjective as advertising campaigns I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. To be honest it's probably the only meaningful way to asses the meaning of advertising.

Here's some examples of ads they have made that purposely position the magazine as a publication for smart people:

http://cdn.static-economist.com/sites/default/files/gymnasium.jpg?1400688228

http://www.officialsamuel.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/4089.jpg

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/2c/37/ca/2c37caf3b2fb226108b99dc805750870.jpg

http://cdn.welovead.com/upload/photo_db/2009/08/14/200908141852188284/960_960/200908141852188284.jpg

This last ad was written by a legendary copywriter called David Abbot who established this position for the Economist as a 'thing that smart people read'. This position for the brand (brand=imaginary construct) has underpinned their communications about the magazine (the physical product) for a long time and is generally considered in the ad industry to one of the great pieces of branding through copywriting. I only mention this so you don't think I'm blatantly cherry picking with the ads I found. There are other ads that deviate from this core concept.

Also I hope you can see I'm not criticising The Economist for presenting themselves in this way. They've paid people to do it for them, and if anything I think it's brilliant.

(and apologies for coming across as snarky in my previous comment. You caught me pre coffee)

[–]riggorous 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

...are you saying that The Economist is not a pop science paper? I mean, I'd begrudgingly accept that the Financial Times is at least somewhat technical, but come on. And how would such a statement about any other magazine be any less sweeping?

Anyway, in the same vein, one could say that quantum physics attracts these kinds of people. That doesn't mean that quantum physics is unscientific. It means that, for a number of reasons, morons like to refer to it.

[–]ender89 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

"smart enough to know how much I don't know" is what I always say. And it's not really a brag or anything, it's just that from the outside of a speciality someone can look like they know a whole lot about what they're talking about, but if you know about a subject you can really see the gaps in your knowledge.

[–]wexpyke 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Is no one gonna point out that the person who invented cynicism was a greek philosopher.

[–]yummyyummypowwidge 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Ah, the rare doubleverysmart

[–]DarryLarrell 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

"The rhetorics".

[–]youlookfly 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

That's a pretty good name for a band.

[–]ButWhy33 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Fucking Oscar Wilde could be the poster child of this subreddit tbh

[–]wisdumb 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Ancient Greek philosophers were mostly cynics though.

[–]indianawalsh 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Lysias is my favorite rhetoric.

[–]BeardyCheese 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Damn rhetorics. Every time!

[–]TotesMessenger 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)

[–]jolef 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I like how The Economist attracts very smart people

[–]rocklou -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

I want to believe

[–]s-to-the-am -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AEMiz6rcxc

[–]bestdarkslider -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm intelligent enough to not know anything

Well his first statement isn't wrong.

edit: downvotes?