Do you agree with Schopenhauer that reading too many books can make you 'read yourself stupid"?

do you agree with Schopenhauer that reading too many books can make you 'read yourself stupid"?

do you agree that reading too many books limits your ability to think for yourself?

Attached: 1430005633926.jpg (576x635, 127K)

ive thought about this, and to be honest im dumber if i dont read so i might as well read and then create my own opinions and thoughts after I've read enough.

yes i agree with this in particular although i can see schopenhauer's point in a sense

No
Reading many books is still better than watching Netflix , YouTube or capeshit
He came from a different time,where books where one of the popular means of entertainment

its good to rest a bit and reflect after you finished a book every week for a few months. This isent an issue if yoy reflect and draw your own conclusions, maybe even write an essay on how you feel on a particular book. It only becomes a problem when your finishing a 500+ page book every week non-stop just consuming

Where does he say this? I imagine it has something to do with his notion of genius, right?

Anyway I think there's something to that, but reading philosophy is still important and insightful.

Didn't Schopenhauer just talk about stepping back sometimes to think and reflect on what you read, to digest it properly and grapple with it instead of seeing it as an opinion or correction as philosophy and high literature is ultimately a man grappling with reality which you should do too, and through reading you have the ability to grapple with the grappling of other grapplers.

A lot of what we are is just reflexive habit, so if you spend your time reading bullshit you will absorb and become it to some extent.

Quit pussyfooting around the point and pick a side you fucking pseud.

As far as I remember there was some if-condition linked to his statement insofar that reading too many books without reconsidering them/thinking in one's own terms will link to a state of literate stupidity. You can cite books without even understanding their content

>if-condition
You've outed yourself as someone who never studied logic, pseud.

retard

should clarify that i see his point from the context of the time period when it was written

No

You're the one that doesn't know the word for an antecedent. Go back to computer programming.

YES.

THE WISEACRE ONE IS ERUDITE; THE WISE ONE IS SAPIENT.

THOSE WHO READ IN EXCESS, GLUT THE SOIL OF THEIR PSYKHE, TURNING IT INTO A SWAMP, AND INSTEAD OF REAPING THE FRUIT OF MINERVA, THEY BECOME IMBUED BY THE PESTILENCE OF PETULANCE.

not the one you're replying to but your heavy reliance on aristotelian logic doesn't make you look that smart either. It's actual pseud level you're propagating and just makes you look bad.

thank you for the input

The grapple pill

doesn't matter how much you read as long as you think about it for yourself.

>your heavy reliance on aristotelian logic
What? Material conditionals are used far beyond syllogistic logic. Congrats, you've also outed yourself as a pseud.

You're missing the point. You're attacking a person for getting the semantics wrong. But your obvious reaction that consists of insulting people, getting defensive and calling them pseuds shows that you're a troll so case closed.

If truediltom is an accurate analog, then absolutely.

how?
retard

>getting defensive
lol nice dunning-kruger

>retard
seething

Ever since he distanced himself from Austrolibertarianism, he's been uncritically regurgitating the philosophy of whatever book or Wikipedia article he has read most recently.

>dunning-kruger
you just outed yourself as a redditor. congratulations, now go back

>only redditors know of academic studies with real-world relevance
What's it like not having graduated college?

How long of a break would you recommend, senpai?I plan on actually taking time to study and digest books after I slog through my recommendations.

Yes, to an extent. I've always read Schopenhauer's worry about books as criticism of mass media/mass culture. Books are just another form of mass media. It's not all inherently bad, but relying on it too heavily just makes someone else do the thinking for you.

Yes.
It's why everyone on Yea Forums should keep a journal or diary desu.

What does Minerva mean?

YOU ARE SIMPLY RESTATING THE POINT OBNOXIOUSLY

depends on what you read obviously
you read a lot of shit and you can only think about shit
see: literature after the 18th century