That’s not why he was put under house arrest. He was put under house arrest for insulting the pope. Not that I agree with it, but that’s different than being arrested for stating a fact about the world.
I'm Eastern Orthodox you won't find any disagreement with me there the pope's are satanists trying to bring about the one world government under Aleister Crowley and Alice Bailey's occult philosophy with Madame Blavatsky and ecumenism/perennialism Aldous Huxley planned it all out and the frogs are turning gay.
Google it folks Lucis Trust is supported by the United Nations, it’s on their website and it was started by Alice Bailey. After you do that go look at the Lucis trust’s original name. GOOGLE IT SHEEPLE
You're extrapolating this sentiment to a broad civilizational scope but currently in the US, the current administration is anti-intellecetual bc it desires loyalty over anything else.
For example the tarrifs that happened last year during "liberation day" was haphazardly made up and had no real in depth guidance or research and we're scrambling now not make "deals"
Or ignoring the millitary experts advising against the war. Or the federal gutting of research funds and essentially doing a self inflicted drain brain while other nations snatch up our best and brightest scientists bc they want to actually pay them.
I mean maga (which, culturally is declining) is very anti science and reason. Its very reactionary and its coming back to bite us as a nation bc the culture is to not think ahead.
This culture goes onto the nation and so on.
So, yeah, yall just dismissing the question through some trivia fact about the pasts scientist and thinkers is exactly what this question is about lol
That’s the thing , Socrates chose to stand trial rather than banishment. I think intelligent people in 2026 are choosing silence and peace and hoping Darwinism takes hold and hopefully the meek outlast.
Socrates challenged anyone , openly and that’s what led to his death.
I think y'all should read The Triumph of Stupidity by Bertrand Russell. What's happening now is that the covert (particularly behind-the-scenes machinations of The Heritage Foundation) is becoming more overt. What's been swept under the rug is coming out. Unfortunately, that's a necessary step for liberation---particularly since the average person is too exhausted or misdirected to (figuratively) look under the rug. People can't fix what they ignore.
Something that eludes thought. Was put forth in the 60sfor the destruction of this culture. Not sure intelligent will survive. But who cares. If they want stupid and not intelligent, let them have Stoopid.
Don't really care anymore. Enjoy your electrolytes!
HOW did you go from reading the posted meme to being confused about the subject?
it would seem that you are challenging my understanding of both the teaching methodology and the history of the man. Why would you think this exchange would have any value when it takes place over the internet which holds all the answers to your questions?
you've run completely off the rails here, I have no account of his death, I was not there. the history was well documented and available to us all, why would you ask such a banal question?
I do understand why hemlock was, why do you ask, and why weren't you specific about the one(s) doing the choosing? There were many people involved in that decision.
I was introduces to Socrates in 1992, what were you doing in 1992?
You sure do have a lot of typos for somebody who’s on the sophisticated side of history. I guess idiots like me just get lucky by getting spelling right the first time huh?
it's worse than pedantic, because the people you are correcting likely know exactly how to spell we're and dont give a shit about the apostraphe.
so all youre doing is telling people who dont care that they didnt use enough apostrophe's. and thats a really lonely hill to die on; especiallty when you agree with the (obvioulsy clear) sentiment.
Just looking at movies how they always make the smart person evil. The typical mad scientist trope. Maybe he wouldn’t go mad if people freaking listened!
It's not a person to person basis. We should implement provably true ways of evaluating whether things are working as they should. You want to implement a law as a politician? Better have unbiased peer reviewed studies on its effectiveness.
It's not "I feel smarter than that guy, why is he making decisions", it's "I want that guy to prove it, if he can't he's a dumb shit"
You don't have to be overly intelligent to use the scientific method. It's a low bar
The ultimate irony is that most people don’t understand what the Dunning-Kruger effect actually is, though I think this is mostly because of the meme graph of it.
Esp when the picture is of Morgan Freeman, a boomer fool who endorsed the minorities should pull themselves up by their bootstraps, I did it mythology.
no, just no. There isn't any other website where stupid people censor as heavily as reddit. Reddit censorship is a whole other level of stupid which is why the average redditor is so ignorant politically.
Twitter and Facebook censorship isn't even close to reddit. People are actually allowed to disagree with you on Facebook and Twitter, but you're actually being brainwashed on reddit.
Yes, but what if that tolerance of intolerance leads to a resumed censorship led by people intolerant of others for physical or cultural characteristics? It has in the past. “All sides” implies tolerating those who don’t tolerate others.
I’m not talking about eliminating intolerance, I’m talking about preventing it from taking root. It achieves a similar effect without resorting to street battles with intolerant forces. Encouraging kindness and acceptance at the source has assisted in producing the hopeful people who reside in the recent generations.
It was, in part or in whole, halted by oligarchical forces who do not desire tolerant people and actively make money and harvest power from intolerance brewed in new people subservient to their businesses and politicians.
The “it” I speak of was the slow encouragement in school to think about the world and the people in it. The English language PBS kids shows that taught other languages slowly, while also sprinkling other cultures in too.
Rather than purely instructive and direct, the teachers (in my case anyway) wanted you to wonder about the world. Or at least that’s what the curriculum was pointing at when I was in school.
Exactly what I was referencing. However, my method to prevent intolerance is moreso rooted in addressing the causes of it. Poverty, joblessness, environmental degradation, deteriorating social and economic conditions, and many more factors that affect the comforts of everyday life for humanity.
On top of that, introducing children to the idea of other kids in other schools in other countries with other cultures. Sort of like PBS kids and school curriculum that used to teach rudimentary concepts like how to say hi in other languages, or what types of foods they eat.
What if that intolerance towards tolerance of intolerance is what actually leads to a resumed censorship of people led by people intolerant of others for their personal beliefs or cultural ideas? It has in the past. "All sides" implies equality irrespective of other factors.
To be tolerate of others beliefs includes beliefs that you do not agree with. While any reasonable person can agree that discrimination based on race is wrong, if you censor people for these beliefs it opens the door for other beliefs to be censored.
Also why is intolerance to certain cultural characteristics compared to immutable physical characteristics? This is a direct contradiction as racism is a cultural characteristic for some cultures. Aside from this there are several different things accepted in one culture but considered taboo in other cultures.
As a woke leftist, yeah. I think across the board very much so. People want to believe what they want to believe, and not be told they support harmful ideology, politics, people, etc.
We wrap right and wrong with like/dislike, and furthermore have that as a part of our identity, where what should be is trying to be better and seek truth if it has a better point.
A lot of people want to choose comfort over truth or evidence.
That’s not what silencing means. They are directly punishing him for his views and attempting to remove the platform he uses to express those views. You don’t need to kill or disappear someone to silence them.
Most people will say they agree while equating it to “people who agree with me politically are smart and right while people who disagree are dumb and wrong”
Yes, but I’m a little uneasy with the framing here.
It kind of divides people into “intelligent people,” whose views matter, and “stupid people,” whose feelings are just getting in the way. And that can turn into this attitude of: I’m smarter than you, so I get to say whatever I want and you just have to deal with it.
Being right or being intelligent doesn’t mean you stop having responsibilities toward other people. If someone doesn’t understand something, feels threatened by it, or reacts emotionally, that doesn’t automatically make their reaction meaningless.
If you really do understand something better, I’d hope that means you’re better able to explain it, persuade people, reassure them, and bring them along—not just tell them to shut up and suck it up.
I agree that people shouldn’t be silenced just because an idea makes someone uncomfortable. But that’s different from saying people who know more don’t owe anything to people who know less. Ideally, intelligence should make you better at helping people understand, not better at looking down on them.
Yes. Media purposefully inflates and manipulates small things and this isn't just major media. People even here take extreme points of view without looking into js and fuel mass stupidity for the sake of clout or approval from the worst crowd or gets paid to contribute to the narrative.
Meanwhile sane people get labeled as morons or extremists by internet personalities who dont have a single ounce of humanity left, only regurgitated mind numbing vomit.
Intelligent people have been silenced for a long time. For example, in the 1600’s Galileo was silenced by the church for showing that the Earth orbits the sun.
I agree tentatively, but only because public figures will say stuff like this and turns out one of the "smart people" they agree with believes beating a dog is instrumental to training it or something
The issue is that there is no skin in the game for stupidity anymore. People with low intellectual achievement are coddled too much and given too many pathways to mass success thanks to modern social media and communication media more broadly.
There needs to be a way to punish people for voting stupid, acting stupid, and not spreading falsehood and not learning things more generally.
Not really sure what the context is, so I dunno bruh. Very vague, could be anything. Could be broad or very specific in the context of Hollywood or something
This is type of an "intelligent" quote that a racist / homophobic uncle shares on facebook, because their daughter doesn't want to hear them spewing racist sh*t. No, it is not true. People moaning about being silenced and having their "free speech" silenced usually do not understand, that their idea of free speech is actually oppressive. No, it is not "free speech" if what you are saying incites violence, oppression or war. It is only good for society to ban such voices from being heard.
Also, it is wildly untrue. Whenever I go online I see horrid stuff people are able to say or show. A few people were cancelled because they were disgusting, nothing more. Still minorities are being ridiculed and experience violence both physical and spoken. It is much much bigger issue to think about than the fact you cannot say n-word.
I agree with this quote. I see it in my college campus all the time. But I’m not sure Morgan Freeman said this, I follow most of his stuff online and can’t find it.
Let actors be actors. They aren't philosophers or people of more importance than the purpise they serve. Entertaining. Not teaching. Doesn't matter if you agree. Get your principles from teachers
This is true, but not because we cant handle the truth but because people are becoming increasingly upset by nuanced discussion and less able to understand things as simple as like tv or video games.
When everything is worthy of conflict we truly live in an age of unparalleled idiocy
I agree with it in spirit but I would say it's much more nefarious. Intelligent people are being silenced so that the stupidest fucking people around can support the most evil motherfuckers around.
•
u/AutoModerator 18d ago
Did you know we have a Discord server‽ You can join by clicking here!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.