>When you realise the only way forward is to bring down Academia

File: women.png (49KB, 1182x379px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 1182x379px

>When you realise the only way forward is to bring down Feminism

ftfy

>>9118973
>too afraid of heights to stand on the shoulders of giants

>>9119005
kekistan

>>9119014
I am a giant, pleb.

And I got my height reading downloaded books!

It's the only way, friends.

>>9118973
You can bring down Academia. You can raze the walls of the institution, pull out the chairs and the lecture halls and burn them in the streets. You can do this.

But if you think that's destroying it, you are mistaken: you're only forcing it to evolve. You're only refining it. You are reducing it to its constituent elements - academicians - and calling forth the spirit of those whose entire existence is predicated and defined by their need to know.

This is how we find our way toward omniscience.

>>9120505
>omniscience
(Our) Nature is structured in a way that opposites the realization of such a thing.

>>9120505
Fucking awesome post.

>>9118973
I recently started reading Moldbug's Open Letter blog posts and he really makes a convincing argument against Academia and the Press. I agree with OP though, many people say that this new age of information is going to lead to information overload. It will for some, but for people who won't get distracted it will open the flood gates to vast amounts of information and discourse not available anywhere else. I am a STEM major at my uni, but I'm teaching myself humanities at home on my free time.

>>9119049
>And I got my height reading downloaded books!
You realise that people in academia do this and then some, right? Like, academia is not just reading shit.

>>9120751
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-nature

>>9119045

>People who tout "Kekistan" are probably 99.9% white

I support Kekistan's existence because if it were to actually become a state it would basically be a white nationalist state.

>>9120505

Okay fine but Yale and Harvard still need to be turned into landfills, their student body and professors all permanently blacklisted from employment or state benefits, and their grants redistributed to government research. Then we can use the propaganda in your post to convince them that we are not "destroying them" but just "forcing them to evolve".

>>9118973
>tfw there's proscribed questions but I always do custom ones

CHART THE UNKNOWN MY FRIENDS CHART THE UN

KNOWN

>>9120812
These institutions may be despicable, but we'd be losing a lot of great minds and resources if we went a long with your plan.

>>9118973
Sorry you didn't get in, anon.

>>9120927
""""""""great"""""" """"""""minds"""""""

File: image.jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

>>9120812

Fuck off I just want a good job and raise redpilled children

this is the fucking gauntlet for me. I don't need to enter your gas chamber

>>9120986
Harvard must burn, sorry.

>>9120793
Is this a reddit thing?

>>9121015
It's a logic thing.

>>9118973
mein n word

>>9120991

I basically get paid to go, so I'm grateful for the opportunity, but people here are often uncritically liberal at best

>>9121017
Omniscience relating to nature logically would mean to coincide the incompatible. There are notions of nature that contradict themselves as in modern science versus Aristotelian metaphysics. So saying that omniscience of nature is not possible is not a logical fallacy.

>>9121059
And yet here you are claiming knowledge about the ontological boundaries of nature's ability to evolve to know itself...

>>9121060
I don't claim anything about nature itself but about human's incapability to gain an omniscient knowledge about it.

>>9121082
Humans ARE nature, bro. If you can't know the limits of nature then you can't know the limits of humans' evolving capacity to understand it.

>>9121092
Dissolving any sort of fundamental difference between human and non-human things through reducing both to nothing but nature, indeed changes the perspective. Insofar omniscience is at least a possibility.
But then one must assume that this knowledge is identical with nature. Which is not something common at all as knowledge as we have it is always knowledge about something that is not identical with nature but rather our understanding of something natural. So I wonder how such convergent knowledge would be conceivable or expressable.

>>9121159
And the point is that we could never know until it happens. It's like asking an infant to tell you what it would feel like to have object permanence. Total revolution of consciousness, not extra knowledge but changes in the form of knowledge itself.

File: seleucidbullynotsotough.jpg (255KB, 708x826px) Image search: [Google]

255KB, 708x826px

I understand what you mean.

As institutions, "universities" are no better than schoolhouses or seminaries. However, they attract intelligent yet hedonistic people by virtue of their sheer resources, and this combination allows them (universities) to maintain a monopoly on esoterica.

I go a step further and advocate individual reclamation of all worthwhile tomes from college libraries. That is, steal them.

File: images.jpg (23KB, 365x403px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 365x403px

>>9121159

>>9121162
The way you explained this makes sense so yeah, I agree with this. Did not think of that first even though this is not a totally new idea either in retrospect.
It would be an astonishing event if such thing would happen during our times. It would be like that case when someone finds an somehow irrefutable evidence of god. Obviously such an evidence can not be reduced to logic or language as a means of conveying it.

>>9120927
>all the thought leaders in womens studies

>>9121205
And all the people studying science, math, engineering, and philosophy will never contribute to anything to humanity. I do agree that these institutions are harmful. They serve the purpose of grooming the elite and maintaining the existing social order, but that doesn't make everyone that attends one worthy of punishment.

>>9120812
You do know that Yale was founded in 1701 and Harvard in 1636, right?