Me when I never heard of libraries.
Virtual Cafe Awards
This thread has been viewed 1464 times.
Right. The "elite" weren't always nefarious in their collusions.
Most people do use it, the vast majority of Marketing/Influence efforts attempt to buy as much of your Dopamine as possible and saturated choice array paralyzes choice parameters.
That's entirely untrue. No one gets to decide how intelligent they are. I could entertain an exception of sorts (which, again, I'll admit gets metaphysical), but, by and large, there's no real exception for genetic predisposition to IQ ranges. The exception even proves the role here. What I think you meant is there's no reason to be too lazy about applying effort to informed discussion. Personally, I'm not sure I completely agree. I don't want everyone to outsource all their thought processes to some AI like an automaton, but that's unfortunately where we're headed here (for people outside of a certain IQ range, that is).
The irony of the denial of desire is that is causes a greater hunger in response. Many of those who seek to follow a Stoic or Buddhist mindset also don't read into how both expressed not extreme asceticism but a life of balance, to avoid being consumed by the fires of passion in excess. Also, it takes a great developed sense of self awareness and selflessness to know when to let go of obsession and to break free of bad habits, or at least make sure they are less frequent. Of course, many people also don't ask and question the life they lead, and whether it truly helps them or is actually detrimental to them.
Ascetic practices are pretty core to the Stoic and (most) Buddhist lifestyles, particularly the latter's more monastic focuses. While there is eventually some exception to both and Stoics do tend to lean into Moderation a bit more admittedly, the both of them are so popular initially due to their embrace of asceticism.
I think they are capable of learning a little more, but they need adequate approaches/methods to meet their needs and the content to be learned. And educational institutions, worldwide, are waaay behind in implementing these alternatives to the traditional ways of teaching/learning. In our social imaginary we still equate reading to learning, case in point the op.
It's not a lack of resources, it's an overabundance of them.
mythologizing the struggle in this way is dumb imo. the motivation and discipline to study and learn something new mostly comes from within and is intrinsic - justifying its absence as a consequence of being able to easily see boobs or youtube vids rings hollow to me. i taught myself html from tutorials online as a kid; it didn't help me advance in school, it didn't help me see boobs or achieve anything online, it was just for fun and only possible because of the abundance of free information available to me via unfettered internet access.
Imagine what you could've achieved without a global market providing you with an abundance of new varieties of fruit.
People that don't engage don't want - a lack of Passion.
Perhaps I should explain - Cone's special interest is fruit. My comment is a glib remark reflecting that the desire for seeing breasts is not unique to seeing breasts, and the abundance of satisfactions to wants, distractions and goals of the individual are unique to the person.
The reason the reference is potent is because it deals with the synthesis of a specific set of hormones, which is a bit more important to this conversation than you seem to let on. Unfortunately, your reduction to "it's just another fleeting satisfaction" is pretty off the mark for these neurological reasons. In fact, this is exactly why the Libido Dominandi agenda is so prolific and effective.
I understand you because I'm like that too, but you have to recognize that not all people display this internal drive to learn (because this drive is always present, is part of how human cognition works), and that is a problem way beyond the individual level, it's a social problem that was always present, but mutates through time. 30 years ago people would have blamed futbol. So, the question is, why are certain populations displaying this lack of agency towards their education? You mentioned motivation, which is an affective factor, so what is happening around these people that impacts so much in their intrapersonal world?
If we can equate lack of want to internal drive to learn, then is not that it doesn't exist in such people. Multiple social factors that translate into individual factors are (and were) interfering in the manifestation of said want/drive. It's not that easy like them plebs we patricians. Also, what is dumb vs what is intelligent? an indigenous person might not be able to read and write, but certainly is more aware of their surroundings and how to manipulate them in their favour. That is valuable and more useful knowledge than whatever you and I might know.
