7 ms·

People do not learn by reading. Reading only helps to re-enforce what you already believe in and are open to accepting (all other propositions are ALWAYS discar

People do not learn by reading. Reading only helps to re-enforce what you already believe in and are open to accepting (all other propositions are ALWAYS discarded - no exceptions, regardless of how "objective" you think you are). I myself only accept what works for me. I am pragmatic to the extreme. I know of NO other person who fully agrees with my philosophy on life (my fundamental beliefs are VERY different from what is commonly accepted) - but that's exactly the point - that's what makes 'me' me. Now I have offered the above guidelines for those who are already inclined to agree. I have no interest in arguing or convincing those who do not.

marklgr 11y ago
> I have no interest in arguing or convincing those who do not. In my experience, people who say that have a lot of interest in convincing others. It's like, "I don't care what people think or say". It's mostly pre-emptive reply to criticism.
- isolate 11y ago
  Abstracting further, explicit and unprompted denials are usually protecting something.
  - jdimov10 11y ago
    That is correct - I am protecting my (very expensive) time from having to waste it on convincing you of something that you don't believe in, when the convincing would not do me any good anyway.
    - marklgr 11y ago
      This is not about trying to convince people, it is about bringing convincing arguments to make an interesting discussion. Otherwise, that's just your opinion thrown in there, and why should anyone care?
      - jdimov10 11y ago
        I'm glad you asked. This is exactly what the essence of my philosophy is all about. I believe that each person's opinions (and each person's existence) are valuable in and of themselves - no need for any further arguments. You either agree with someone (as some people agreed with my original comment, judging by the number of up-votes) or you disagree - and, in my experience, there is NEVER any value in trying to bring those from one camp into the other. Arguments are always a waste of time. Sharing stimulating ideas is a much better use of time and language. So, no, this is not about "convincing arguments". As with all of existence, this is about making a statement of who you really are and inspiring others. There is intrinsic value in that. I believe in leadership by example. I do not believe in leadership by "convincing arguments".
        marklgr 11y ago
        That sounds like a fairly postmodern-ish stance, which I don't really subscribe to. To me, some opinions are better than others, and being able to articulate them well, showing where they come from and what they immply, is part of what makes many discussions interesting. I don't assume an opinion is so good that others will understand it immediately so there would be no need talk about it, or that it is a great piece of wisdom that I should study or let others study. Good discussions can make you see things differently, take a new perspective that you had not fully considered before. If you only make "life statements" and never cordially exchange points of view, you lose a much useful way of changing your own; you risk keeping yourself in a warm sense of certitude, losing precious feedback from other people's insight.
MarcusP 11y ago
You contradict yourself. If someone is open to accepting what they read, as anyone who was intending to learn by reading would be to some extent, then they can learn by reading. I guess you've never had to pay rent/mortgage or had to support anyone. In the real world, your advice would get you out on the streets.
- jdimov10 11y ago
  In the real world, I support a large family of which I am the only person making money. I have three young children. I pay rent for a house in London proper. Not that any of this is any of your business, but I said it before and I repeat it again - I am EXTREMELY pragmatic and ONLY believe in that which works for me. I am ruthless when it comes to dismissing beliefs that other people accept as dogmatic, but that don't work for me.
vdaniuk 11y ago
>People do not learn by reading If that is true your comment is utterly useless to anyone reading it.
- jdimov10 11y ago
  Your logic is lacking.
- laotzu 11y ago
  "Those who speak do not know, and those who know do not speak" -Said the guy who wrote the Tao Te Ching
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

marklgr 11y ago

> I have no interest in arguing or convincing those who do not. In my experience, people who say that have a lot of interest in convincing others. It's like, "I don't care what people think or say". It's mostly pre-emptive reply to criticism.

isolate 11y ago
Abstracting further, explicit and unprompted denials are usually protecting something.
- jdimov10 11y ago
  That is correct - I am protecting my (very expensive) time from having to waste it on convincing you of something that you don't believe in, when the convincing would not do me any good anyway.
  - marklgr 11y ago
    This is not about trying to convince people, it is about bringing convincing arguments to make an interesting discussion. Otherwise, that's just your opinion thrown in there, and why should anyone care?
    - jdimov10 11y ago
      I'm glad you asked. This is exactly what the essence of my philosophy is all about. I believe that each person's opinions (and each person's existence) are valuable in and of themselves - no need for any further arguments. You either agree with someone (as some people agreed with my original comment, judging by the number of up-votes) or you disagree - and, in my experience, there is NEVER any value in trying to bring those from one camp into the other. Arguments are always a waste of time. Sharing stimulating ideas is a much better use of time and language. So, no, this is not about "convincing arguments". As with all of existence, this is about making a statement of who you really are and inspiring others. There is intrinsic value in that. I believe in leadership by example. I do not believe in leadership by "convincing arguments".
      - marklgr 11y ago
        That sounds like a fairly postmodern-ish stance, which I don't really subscribe to. To me, some opinions are better than others, and being able to articulate them well, showing where they come from and what they immply, is part of what makes many discussions interesting. I don't assume an opinion is so good that others will understand it immediately so there would be no need talk about it, or that it is a great piece of wisdom that I should study or let others study. Good discussions can make you see things differently, take a new perspective that you had not fully considered before. If you only make "life statements" and never cordially exchange points of view, you lose a much useful way of changing your own; you risk keeping yourself in a warm sense of certitude, losing precious feedback from other people's insight.

MarcusP 11y ago

You contradict yourself. If someone is open to accepting what they read, as anyone who was intending to learn by reading would be to some extent, then they can learn by reading. I guess you've never had to pay rent/mortgage or had to support anyone. In the real world, your advice would get you out on the streets.

jdimov10 11y ago
In the real world, I support a large family of which I am the only person making money. I have three young children. I pay rent for a house in London proper. Not that any of this is any of your business, but I said it before and I repeat it again - I am EXTREMELY pragmatic and ONLY believe in that which works for me. I am ruthless when it comes to dismissing beliefs that other people accept as dogmatic, but that don't work for me.

vdaniuk 11y ago

>People do not learn by reading If that is true your comment is utterly useless to anyone reading it.

jdimov10 11y ago
Your logic is lacking.
laotzu 11y ago
"Those who speak do not know, and those who know do not speak" -Said the guy who wrote the Tao Te Ching

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]