The Hazards Of Over-Education.

[Note: I was reading someone’s comments/profile and it made me think about the below stuff.  I will not name the person whose comments/profile it was though, to be polite.]

When you educate yourself, you should mainly concern yourself with facts, and concern yourself little with opinions.  Because if you study philosophy or theology and accept the ideas you learn as if they were facts, you will just muddle your mind and make it a mess.

I just got done responding to a guy who says he has a degree in philosophy and who can’t argue for shit and has to use all of these dishonest tactics and be deliberately vague etc.  He would have been better off thinking up his own philosophy and learning how to think in the process than reading a dozen or even a hundred books on philosophy or theology.

Now I’m not saying exposing yourself to new ideas or learning about the history of human thought is bad, but it’s a lousy substitute for an honest day’s thinking.  A philosopher should learn only enough philosophy here and there to keep them thinking.  Lest you spend your days muttering about presuppositions and referring to other philosophers’ arguments rather than articulating your own.

Anyway, I went to this guy’s site because he sounded like he had a stick up his ass (“…I am not available to fully comment about the rest of your dictum; however, after my sporting event, I shall respond with further points.”) and so I was curious as to whether he was from another country, he sounded perhaps british.  So I went to his profile and found the list of his favorite books:

Morrow Theology, Dogmatic Theology, Christian Philosophy, Van Til Apologetics, Always Ready, Resurrection of the Son of God, The People of God, Ethics, and Justification

Every one a religious book filled with religious opinions.  Anyway, that got me thinking, because as an atheist, here is the list of books about atheism and why there is no god that I have read:

Nope, not one.  I’ve never read a book by an atheist that talked about atheism in my life.  But I have literally never met a religious person whose arguments I couldn’t neatly dismantle.  Because I didn’t cheat and just adopt other peoples’ ideas and let my brain rot in my head.

Anyway, though it was worth a mention.


About agnophilo

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

26 Responses to The Hazards Of Over-Education.

  1. Justin_DeBin says:

    Well my degree is in electronics so you must not have been talking about me.

  2. Those type of people aren’t even worth the fight. Everything you may say will be turned against you, I usually just ignore those type of people because it gets boring talking in circles over and over again.

  3. FisherAmes says:

    Sir,Well, you are quite correct instating that my rhetoric is deduced and learn’t from the United Kingdom.Lancaster, England was the city, by which, I was fortunate to be raisedin and allowed to study philosophy and classical education in my lowerand upper schooling. I noticed that you ran and created your own blog responseand never fully quoted my comments, which I must say, I am not surprisedthat you would do such a thing. I find that humorous that you would saythat I am not able to think for myself and I must depend upon others todo my sagacity. I find it more intellectually honest to grade oneself againstthe great minds of philosophy throughout human history, such as, DavidHume, Aristotle, Plato, Emmanuel Kant, all those which endorsed LogicalPositivism in America, German Idealism, and etc. So, I guess, by your ownprofession, you have never read a book on your own axiom. Is that supposedto make you insightful or someone, which can reason within the guidelinesof the laws of logic?  If you are that self-deceived, then philosophyisn’t the means to assist you with that dilemma, lol.If you are not aware of the terminology,by which, I utilize, then ask for clarity; however, you sought to run andmake an argument from silence to defeat a proposition or axiom, which noone was aware of it. I do wish for an honest and rational dialogue. Ifyou are not able to do so, then please bow out graciously and don’t makeobtuse comments against others you disagree with. I guess, you have a dilemmawith those, which are efficiently trained in a particular skill set. Wouldyou have the same complaint or charge against the once great atheist GordonStein, Michael Martin, and other? Of course not! This is because they agree/agreedwith your presuppositions and you don’t wish to have true dialogue. Iguess I can expect another wonderful blog post about how arrogant and uncouththe Christian has been on other blog posts towards you.Btw, it’s not rude to share, I’m sure your readers will want to read for themselves the full dialogue not just your point of view, here is the original blog where I responded to you.

  4. I disagree with the opinions contained in this post, and defer to Fisher. If you find his response inadequate (and I am not saying I agree with all of his points, only those propagating the history of thought) I will be happy to stand in his place. 

  5. jenessa1889 says:

    I totally agree.   Knowing what other people think is not a substitute for thinking.I makes me absolutely insane when I ask someone why they believe what they believe and they link me to someone else’s opinion or tell me I need to read some book they read to understand.   If you can’t condense the argument into your own words, or give a general overview smaller than the length of a book, you don’t actually know what you’re talking about.   The measure of whether you really get something is whether you can restate it in your own words and/or summarize it.Now that I think about it idk if what I wrote had anything to do with this post lol, but that’s what it made em think of anyway.

  6. I believe you are correct. I think that the only way to be sure about your belief system is to know your opposition. Therefore, I had no problem studying both creationism and the theory of evolution; atheism and Christianity as well as Judaism and Islam. True debate is knowing both sides and knowing where you stand, regardless of if it’s factual or spiritual.

  7. SerenaDante says:

    Yup. He’s got a stick up his ass, and that’s even more evident from his response here.Also, the problem here is not over-education at all. It’s under-education – this person has not been educated at all in anything besides what he WANTS to know.

  8. You only dismantle arguments in your own mind.  In truth, you are unable to understand even the most rudimentary thinking.Your anti intellectual tirade, which is what this post is, is simply an ode to butt ignorance and the values of the lower class.

  9. great post. i hate people like the guy you mentioned, i tend to stay away from debates about religion. i used to love them but i’ve realised it’s pointless arguing about something that is mostly based on opinion, no matter how many “facts” are thrown about and how many big words are used..”he sounded perhaps british” – that actually made me laugh out loud :p (i live in the uk)

  10. well, I agree and disagree.Back in the day, liberal/ moral degrees were reserved for people who had certain positions in society.  Now anyone can do it, but not everyone ends up in the right place. The current degrees of don’t hold much prestige.When I first started College, I was to be an English major.  It made me want to kill myself.  It’s too much soul searching, and I was out of harmony with my life because long time dead male doesn’t know my reality and fatass who wrote whatever couldn’t help me, and I was dire.  Fatass is actually new because it used to be bad to be a writer by profession instead of a side job.  It was shunned.

  11. @Cookstergirl88 – just tell them to stop the circular logic and illusory correlations.

  12. @Colorsofthenight – oh please don’t address the beast

  13. Sure, you have plenty, A Treatise on Human Nature by David Hume, plenty of stuff by Nietzsche is atheistic, the infamous “God is Dead” proclamation…Bertrand Russell…shit most of the “modern” philosophers were mostly atheists or questioners of deity…except maybe Schopenhauer…and Kierkegaard…the latter spent most his days questioning theology…I mean sure it is fun to massage ones ego and think they have their “own” philosophy but when one becomes educated or at least tries to, I have found that this is merely a myth and that your idea might be at the end of a long line of the game telephone…one that people have forgotten…I used to think Hume was original until I learned that his foundation came from the Stoics and Cicero…The thing is, most of philosophy has been trampled on by others…the only places I think left trodding is how philosophy relates to now using what has been said in the past…and ethics…We synthesize our ideas from somewhere…

  14. HUMOR_ME_NOW says:

    I graduated from college after 8 years at age 30 with a straight ‘C’ average. I had a great career, married 54 years, none of my children are in prison or rehab, and I have out lived all of my family.That proves it. My not being over educated helped a great deal. Of course, I was never promoted to Vice President.

  15. Dargon says:

    I am in the last week of a philosophy course, and let me say it has been a blast, and to be honest, I think more people should take them, since it will get essentially force you to question that which you hold sacred. That being said, it seems to me that logic and rhetoric should be pre-reqs, as it allows you to analyze the philosophy much better rather than just take the opinions presented. Some of them present an awesome sounding idea, but when you look at it, it’s all rhetoric and argument from ignorance. Also, your playlist amused me. Went from Johnny Cash to Marylin Manson. I dig it.

  16. @opheliasbones – The thing is Agnophilo doesn’t want to understand other points of view, he claims to like Theology but will refuse to let someone teach him scripture.  He makes many assumptions, but with such ignorance of what the Bible says, he is just as bad as the Christians he attacks for being ignorant on evolution, big bang, etc.@SerenaDante – It’s under-education – this person has not been educated at all in anything besides what he WANTS to know.That’s nice of you to comfort your friend, but your footprints are no where to be seen on my site in the last 2 days, so are you basing your opinion solely on this guy’s one response here?@wildflowers_x – Agnophilo did the same thing to me when I originally wrote the post, does he get an exception?

  17. Tallman says:

    All of our knowledge comes from some place else…interesting theme song.

  18. It’s interesting what you said about religious people reading religious books filled with religious opinions. I’m a Christian… and last year I attended a rather small, strict Christian college (worst experience of my life, but I won’t bore you with ranting about that). While I was there, I was often chastised because I hadn’t read much Christian non-fiction (especially books about theology). I’m an avid reader, but those kind of books never seemed important to me. People at that school always had their heads buried in some kind of Christian biography, memoir, theology book, or something of the likes. When I expressed that such books held no interest to me, they all seemed appalled. It seemed to me, that those people needed the books in order to form opinions about the Christian faith and theology. They had no idea how to form their own ideas about God and instead, relied on the thoughts and theology of some famous theologian or Christian author. It seems ridiculous and mindless to me.

  19. YouToMe says:

    @SpokenThruScott -  Mark (Agnophilo) does want to know and understand other’s points of view. I am a Christian. We are close friends; he listens to my testimony, hears me talk about my faith, and we have debated with civility. He is quick to listen, quick to understand, patient, and often asks for permission to proceed with a discussion bc he does not want to offend me. But he doesn’t just do this with me. He does this with others who are not superior- acting and/ or condescending towards him. Perhaps if you assume the best of his intentions, you might be surprised at what you might learn. You can articulate very well, but your arguments for God are probably ineffectual if you were not to treat Mark the same way that you would treat Jesus Himself.

  20. YouToMe says:

    @Masked_Melody - I hear ya. Take religious commentaries onreligious commentaries on religious authors, for instance. Lol It zaps the joy right out of me sometimes. 😛

  21. YouToMe says:

    @ANVRSADDAY -  you are a success story, for certain, Frankworth 🙂

  22. @YouTOme – I welcome him to come and discuss, if not I would have blocked him.  But show where he acts like that on my site.  They way you see me acting now is the way he was acting on my site, as you see it’s not fun, and I hope that we would all come to the realization how irritating that is, and he would stop acting that way so we can return to civil dialogue.

  23. agnophilo says:

    @SpokenThruScott – The only incivility of mine on your site is a response to disingenuous and sleazy rhetorical tactics and shamelesslyred slandering me.

  24. HUMOR_ME_NOW says:

    @YouTOme – lol At least I tried.

  25. this kind of blog always useful for blog readers, it helps people during research. your post is one of the same for blog readers.

Speak yer mind.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s