Reading fiction is kind of a waste of time when there is philosophy and psychology to study

Reading fiction is kind of a waste of time when there is philosophy and psychology to study.

Attached: 1561166927544.jpg (1024x674, 70K)

Other urls found in this thread:

victorianweb.org/philosophy/mill/crisis.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

This argument has been put forward since Plato: „philosophy is superior to poetry“, said Socrates, since the former is engaged with the truth, while the latter lies even more than the world of phenomena (building a cavern within the cavern).
It's still a shitty argument. Some major works of fiction have more insight into the great philosophical problems than a lot of non-fiction tractates.

>when there is philosophy and psychology to study.
Why would that be less of a waster of time?

Like what? They mean nothing without a metaphysical problem they're contending w and tbph novels eventually become dated while philosophy never does

Y did u respond? Do u have a different philosophy? As I've always heard, if ure on this earth u have to eat might as well learn to cook so u can eat well, that duck show

Sorry, I don't respond to mentally retarded people who write subhuman English.
Please try again.

Why did you respond user? Dost thus havest a philosophy difference?

>Why did you respond user?
I didn't respond to the contents, I don't even know what is written there and unless you rephrase it into actual English I will never find out.

Poetry cured John Stuart Mill's depression

victorianweb.org/philosophy/mill/crisis.html

People can't just absorb and regurgitate knowledge all the time because it would be absolutely soul destroying, you fucking autists

>impyling psychology isnt fiction

Fiction comes close to the truth more often than philosophy or psychology

A waste of time? So you have some kind of a goal? And you evaluate activity's usefulness in accordance to that goal? And you claim this kind of evaluation is right? State your goal and we might have a discussion.

Nah

not when you do both at the same time

Attached: 41cQTFV5hPL.jpg (313x500, 27K)

Only pretentious pseuds thinks ALL fiction has to contend with a metaphysical problem. It’s also a historically inaccurate expectation, given that fiction started out as pulp literature that wasn’t really taken seriously as an art form until later. if you want metaphysical depth, read poets like John Donne.

Poetry >

It’s like Iris Murdoch said : "ideas" in Dosto’s novel are merely playthings. There is absolutely no philosophical depth in there.

>Iris Murdoch
Literally who?

the best philosophy is written poetically desu, it is a mark of excellence

>being this fucking ignorant
Call me back when you’re done with the 19th century kiddo.

You really believe that shit ? I wish...

Philosophy and psychology is kind of a waste of time when there are girls to pursue.

Mere rationality itself is so weak and useless

too bad it didn't cure his cretinism

Plato was arrogant to believe that he could discern perfectly where the truth was to be found. It can be found in the most unexpected places.

Yah.

Other user's right, you're wrong.

Nah, that shits boring.
Fiction is fun and actually entertaining to read.

>a woman
Jesus Christ, user. I feel bad for you!

>Reading the greatest writing that man's ever written is kind of a waste of time when there is mediocre and poor writing to study.

There is no such thing as the English Novel without women. Also, Iris is great, you pseud. Stop fueling on your own ignorance and start getting ready by rereading Queneau.

I don't know, i feel i will learn more by reading Hegel than by reading the next "a song of ice and fire" book.

how do you 'study' psychology out of curiosity outside the lab/academic setting?

at least with philosophy you have a canon of texts

introduction to psychology and a few books by Jung and Lacan are all a layman needs to study psychology