• Campi@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    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?

  • AmoldyBuffalo@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

  • pinkdrunkenelephants@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t see anything wrong with any of it. Why is thinking or speaking of any of those things being framed as a negative?

    • Leviathan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      None of those things are negatives, this is just anti-intellectualism. Maybe OP has been corrected by douches in the past. The conspiracy theorist in me thinks OP is trying to normalize shaming critical thinking while finding like-minded individuals.

  • joyjoy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Isn’t the phrase closer to “what is stated without evidence can be dismissed without evidence”?