Do you feel that philosophy and reading in general (which the internet has made far more accessible than ever) has made you useless? As in, it made you spend so much of your time developing skills in areas that, really, only individuals backed by wealth are able to take advantage of, rather than developing skills that are more practical for your social/economic/family status? Is this a problem with extending access to higher subjects to the lower echelons of society, or just a personal problem?
>>897293
>Do you feel that philosophy and reading in general (which the internet has made far more accessible than ever) has made you useless? As in, it made you spend so much of your time developing skills in areas that, really, only individuals backed by wealth are able to take advantage of, rather than developing skills that are more practical for your social/economic/family status?
I DO NOT THINK SO.
PERSONS TEND TOWARD ACTIVITY THAT IS SUITABLE TO THEMSELVES, AND TO THEIR PERSONALITY; ACTIVITY DOES NOT DEFINE PERSONALITY, AND PERSON, BUT RATHER, PERSON, AND PERSONALITY, PRACTICE WHAT IS SUITABLE TO THEM.
AN INEPT, OR LAZY, PERSON WILL BE INEPT, OR LAZY, REGARDLESS OF HIS/HER EDUCATION, WEALTH, OR PRESTIGE; PERSONAL QUALITY IS NOT DETERMINED BY THE EXTERNAL, BUT BY THE INTERNAL; ID EST: APTITUDE, OR INEPTITUDE, ARE QUALITATIVELY IMMANENT.
ONE MUST ALSO CONSIDER THE RELATIVE ASPECT OF APTITUDE, AND INEPTITUDE; INEPTITUDE CAN BE MADE APPARENT, OR IT CAN BE INTENSIFIED, IF THE ACTIVITY IS UNSUITABLE TO THE PERSON, OR THE PERSONALITY, AND CONVERSELY, APTITUDE CAN BE MADE APPARENT IF THE ACTIVITY IS SUITABLE TO THE PERSON, OR THE PERSONALITY.
SUITABILITY IS NOT DEPENDENT ON TRANSEUNT CRITERIA LIKE "LEARNING ABOUT CERTAIN TOPICS", OR "HAVING GREATER INTELLECTUAL ACCESS", ETCETERA, BUT IT IS DEPENDENT ON CRITERIA IMMANENT TO THE INDIVIDUAL.
ALSO, IT IS FALLACIOUS TO CLASSIFY SECTORS OF HUMAN ACTIVITY BY SOCIOECONOMIC CRITERIA.
>>897341
But what if the ready access of endless data enables otherwise energetic people with potential to success, as defined by society (i.e. wealth, status etc), to pour that energy into the pursuit of knowledge that won't elevate them as it would've before, when academics was a rarer but certain road to success?
Sorry no caps
>>897382
AN INDIVIDUAL WITH A CERTAIN KIND OF PERSONAL POTENTIAL WILL CONSCIOUSLY, OR UNCONSCIOUSLY, TEND TOWARD ACTIVITY THAT WILL DEVELOP THAT POTENTIAL, RATHER THAN TO ACTIVITY THAT WILL STYMIE THAT POTENTIAL, SO THE HYPOTHETICAL SCENARIO THAT YOU ARE DESCRIBING IS VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE.
FAILURE OF ACTUALIZATION IS NOT DUE TO HAVING ENGAGED IN UNSUITABLE ACTIVITY, BUT DUE TO HINDRANCES EXTERNAL TO THE PERSON; ID EST: TO DETRIMENTAL, OR ADVERSE, CIRCUMSTANCES, NOT TO ENERGY DIVERTED FROM SOME FICTITIOUS PREDETERMINED DESTINY.
