how is this so accurate?

Yeah these fuckin nerds are using logic and thought to understand the world.

How dare they fixate on topics I think are remedial.
Almost like they are stepping stones.
“Emotions are not facts”

Just so I understand this correctly, is this a post mocking 20-something year olds by showing topics they believe to be niche, complex, or exclusive to an intelligent audience? And that by understanding these topics they are “propped up” compared to their peers?

- Offtopic: does anyone know the name of this meme or knowyourmeme reference? Thanks
- Image of average Redditor that feels the inclination to write "fuck Spez" every 5 minutes on the Internet
- I’m still confused

Maybe I’m a dork, but I think“correlation does not equal causation” is actually a good thing to keep in mind.

I’m reminded of it every time a news story says something is “linked” to something else. I hate it when the word “linked” is used in this way. It’s often lazy journalism and/or a scare tactic. Saying that two things are “linked” implies a stronger relationship than may actually exist. I find it deliberately misleading.

Almost everything on the picture is a good thing to keep in mind. But the creator of the meme depicted it as a thought of a soyjack so there is nothing can be done, we now should abandon that logic entirely.
It's at its worst when a paper describes how they account for correlation or designed their experiment to confirm causation, but someone doesn't read the paper and says the line anyway.
You don't need to read the paper but don't try to act smart if you can't be bothered.
- That and "this is worthless, they only tested 10 000 people" are the worst
I mostly agree with you, but it's often used as a phrase to shut down further discussion even when there could be an invisible third event that's the cause for the two seemingly unrelated events. It's gets over used by people who want to be quick to sound smart.
- That phrase is used exactly to say that there is a third unseen force influencing both events. It'd be pretty strange to use that phrase to say the opposite.
  Typically further discussion of the 3rd event isn't relevant, because they're not trying to find the cause, they're trying to disprove a hypothesis.

I don't see anything wrong with any of it. Why is thinking or speaking of any of those things being framed as a negative?

Exactly, thinking and talking about these things is perfectly alright and at 20 they are all quite new to you, so it's very reasonable to be excited about them.
- How dare young people not appreciate the intricacies and nuance of the world? Harrumph! I say.
None of those things are negatives, this is just anti-intellectualism. Maybe OP has been corrected by douches in the past. The conspiracy theorist in me thinks OP is trying to normalize shaming critical thinking while finding like-minded individuals.
- Or this is an attempt at even more critical thinking, i.e. "These are fine concepts, but if you don't reckon with the context of what you're talking about before throwing one of these out because it kinda fits you actually bring conversations down and keep people from exchanging more pertinent ideas and information."
  They probably could have communicated that better if that was their intent, but that'd probably kill any humor potential which was probably more of a priority here.
- You must be fun at parties. Maybe it's just self-deprecating humour?
Yeah I've noticed an uptick in atheists on lemmy recently, I don't support religon at all because of dogma but I also will never support atheism either
- What does any of that have to do with atheism?
- So you're an atheist, right?

Did they just like, throw a bunch of random philosophy bullshit onto a meme? Feels like this was generated by an AI or something lol.

Feels like this was generated by an AI
Like the meme says: thats what an AI would say. Lol
It's like the normie maths meme where soyjak enjoys the monty hall problem and the infinite room hotel but hasn't heard of the boring old theorems people learn in college

I mean, a lot of these things are good things to consider/know about. For example, you do always have to consider that correlation is not necessarily causation. They're not really considering the most deep of philosophy, but thinking is generally better than not thinking.

I bet OP thinks that Ben Shapiro qualifies as "thinker"

Those people are in their 30s now lol

Excuse me, but some of us are already in our fourties thank you very much
- Elder millenials ftw! *high fives and then goes to sit down for a few minutes to recover *
That's agist prescriptivism!
I feel attacked.

That's popular science. On the one hand, it looks shallow, but that just shows that people are curious, and that's okay.

It's Scienceface. You talk to them long enough and you realize they believe in Atlantis and flat earth.
- Where the hell did you find the term "Scienceface". I just checked with Google Trends and there's not enough instances to chart any use.
- but i am a fiat earther ;.;

At least they "think" in contrast to the majority of working bots and angry Twitter idiots. I'd rather deal with a person who tries to have a concept.

Pretty much, my thoughts too since the alternative is them regurgitating whatever opinion they happen to agree with. It's impossible to have a meaningful conversation if the other person can't even turn their brain on past repeating what their preacher/pundit/candidate told them.

I'd rather deal with people who had a cursory understanding or passing familiarity of these things, in spite of some annoyance. Than deal with the proudly ignorant.

Sounds like you don't like thought so you make fun of those that at least try.

This sounds like the epidemy of weaponized ignorance.

Epitome
- That's the joke, silly
OP, please add "epidemy of weaponized ignorance" to the meme!
- Do we do flairs here yet? 😂
For me the meme is that most of these are the very tip of the philosophy and thinking iceberg. And that's fine. What's not fine is taking those basic concepts and trying to use them as defeaters for everything. I think this is what it's poking fun at.
- Exactly. It's taking the piss out off wannabe "deep thinkers" who've speed ran philosophy 101 videos on Youtube. Being well read isn't the joke. The joke is the neckbeards who have to smugly let everyone know that they read a Wikipedia article.
  Ironically, this stereotype probably fits most of the ones who are kicking off. Hell, it's essentially a profile of me. 10 years ago I was that guy saying "hey have you heard about iambic pentameter?". That's why I laughed so hard lmao
epidemy of weaponized ignorance.
Epitome.
Does it still count as weaponized ignorance if the gun goes off in your own face?
- Does it still count as weaponized ignorance if the gun goes off in your own face?
  Yes. That just makes it funny weaponized ignorance.
- Thanks, I was definitely drunk last night. The meme is still bad though.

Turned this into a list without OP's negative framing on them If people genuinely want to look it up later without a negative framing

Because I see no reason to frame them negatively like op has done as these topics are not inherently negative unlike OP's negative bias of them

And bigots using them doesn't make them Inherently negative either

Correlation does not equal causation
Language shapes thought
Artificial intelligence
Stanford prison experiment
Iambic pentameter
Schrodinger's cat
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence
Biblically accurate angels
What if we live in a simulation ?
Video essay
Nuance
Plato's cave
Infographics
Linguistic prescriptivism

Edit: unnoticed typo

Just a friendly reminder: The Stanford Prison Experiment was not an experiment. There was no control group, there wasn't even proper procedures set up. It was just some professor off his rocker that had a dumb idea, made shit up as he went along, forced the outcome, then publicized the results. People always compare it to Milgram. This idiot can't hold a candle to Milgram.

It's an experiment in the way that Love is Blind is an experiment. They think if they just use the right words often enough it can become one.
- Lol great analogy
Sex raft go brrr
basically a casestudy example on how NOT to conduct a study

Sounds like OP lost an argument and is throwing a clever meme-tantrum.

Go ahead and post your intellectually superior topics.

Why, the topic of our intellectual superiority of course!
Right, real intellectuals just post memes mocking people who fluently use basic habits of reason and conversation.

That’s Broden, Mark, and Zach from Auntie Donna

You filled up on cheese, haven't you?

History 'buffs' that only know about the Nazis, Soviets, and the Crusades.

sarcasmHigh School History lessons in Germany in a nutshell/sarcasm
I feel like there are 2 types of casual history buffs what you just said and folks like me who like the bronze age and want to eat random old MREs and rations.

how is this so accurate?

Easy. All these people grew up on the internet looking at the same websites, reading the same meme, laughing at the same threads.

        Universal literacy was supposed to educate the common man to control his environment. Once he could read and write he would have a mind fit to rule. So ran the democratic doctrine. But instead of a mind, universal literacy has given him rubber stamps, rubber stamps inked with advertising slogans, with editorials, with published scientific data, with the trivialities of the tabloids and the platitudes of history, but quite innocent of original thought. Each man's rubber stamps are the duplicates of millions of others, so that when those millions are exposed to the same stimuli, all receive identical imprints. It may seem an exaggeration to say that the American public gets most of its ideas in this wholesale fashion. The mechanism by which ideas are disseminated on a large scale is propaganda, in the broad sense of an organized effort to spread a particular belief or doctrine.

Edward L. Bernays, Propaganda

This post would have gotten more mileage on Reddit.

In the right communities, yeah, but lemmy is highly fragmented
Not much that wouldn't mate.
I think the Reddit crowd would have mostly had the ability to laugh at itself on this one.
Most of the responses on here are acting pretty triggered.
- You're absolutely right. It couldn't possibly have a bad message or promote anti-intellectualism or anything, it is 100% the fault of people who value philosophy and poetry and meaningful thought. How dare they not walk on eggshells around the proudly ignorant

Is this a picture of Aunty Donna?

Haven't you done well?
Can't be, it doesn't have Adrian in it

Frankly, I think the Milgram Shock Experiment is more elucidating as to... hey, wait a minute.

They triggered you like a dog with a bell, eh?

the brain develops in a chronologically similar fashion among members of the same species. even more so when exposed to similar cultural stimuli. that is correct.

I guess I missed people rambling on about HYDRAULIC GIRLDICK

What's the venn diagram with this and katana owners look like?

If your sword didn't come from a mall, it's not a real sword.

Isn't the phrase closer to "what is stated without evidence can be dismissed without evidence"?

It could also be a reference to boondocks

Report for: i am in the picture and i dont like it

please stop sharing my photo online >:(

And I thought I was a real intellectual in my days.... That's exactly what I pested my teachers and fellow students with. In the '90s, though.

Sounds like you were! School is exactly when a person ought to learn this stuff.

"Think different."
"YES! WE ALL THINK DIFFERENT!"

In unison, of course, like Life Of Brian.
Bonus points for bOtH pArTiEs ArE tHe SaMe LoL aMiRiTe.

"I don't..."

Wait, im 20 something?

Thank god I has this phase at 16.

Thank someone you had the phase at all.
I am 17 and that's me and it doesn't seem to be going away any time soon.
- The trick is to read even more philosophy and become even more insufferable.

lol this is so painfully accurate, especially in internet culture where people feel inadequate in real life so they spend their time online wielding their swords of intellect.

I think it's funny that you're salty about people having philosophical discussions on the internet. It's not just for being advertised to and jerkin it.
- I'm salty about pseudointellectualism, not real intellectualism. The current format of short post communication on the internet is just not conducive to intellectual discussion.

I‘m in this picture and I don’t like it…

I blame reddit for this

I’ve got a buddy of mine who is an annoying maga type. Always telling me about Plato’s Cave and he’s definitely not on Reddit. Only thing is he is 40 and not 20 something.
- This type is equally distributed throughout the political spectrum

Incredibly accurate. It’s nuts how they all could be one person.

what if we live in a simulation

Matrix (1999) was way ahead of you. Other works of fiction as well.

People in this thread take themselves wya too seriously

@VirginChad Nae true Scotsman is missing.

Could just put "logical fallacies" in there and call it a day. "Cognitive biases" too.

Damn I got called out

Learning philosophy (and sciences, arts, etc.) is great. I think their real problem is to be dogmatic or arrogant, which is ironic.

You forgot "logic" and "mushrooms" 🙄

I love mushrooms, it's the only logic approach to tendering rabbit for a stew.