https://www.exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,2334220,2334793#msg-2334793

SC declares, "Being well read isn't hero worshipped, its called not ignorant." [sic erat scriptum that hot mess]

I have never known a person to declare themselves "well-read." Maybe I'm well-read, too! Alas and alack, I have no way of knowing if I am well-read due to my ignorance.

To that end, please define "well-read" and provide your reading list. Everyone deserves the opportunity to hang a "Well-read" certificate on their brag wall, preferably framed and with an embossed seal.

Thank you.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/21/2020 01:36AM by Beth.

[sic erat scriptum that hot mess]

Indeed. That was one of those sentences that never stop giving.

Translation: I ask, if this is better? "Thus were blathered foolish things."

My Latin is very rusty.

Tyson

Ah yes, like Acts 17:18, which reads:

"what will this babbler say?"

Declaring one's self 'well read' is on a par with declaring one's self 'saved'. It's all in the mind of the declarer.

And it does no good to ask for the number of books on the list, and their titles...after all, Muggsy Bogues gets an NBA pension check every month, just like every other former NBA player, all of whom are taller than Muggsy.

In comparison to the 108 billion human beings who coexist or have preceded us, SC is most certainly 'well read', and I think
most of us here have a good read on him, despite not having self-elected ourselves to the Readers Hall of Fame.

elderolddog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Declaring one's self 'well read' is on a par with
> declaring one's self 'saved'. It's all in the
> mind of the declarer.

Because of the sheer volume of literature today, it is impossible to keep up with very much. I still think it is possible to be well read.

I read more in a month than some of my friends and acquaintances read in a year. I also know people who don't read books at all. Most board posters would be better read than them.

It also depends on the breadth and the depth of that reading. So yes, it is all relative and subjective, but yes, I think someone can be well read

When it comes to a narrower subject, like say, Joseph Smith, it is definitely possible to be well read because there is limited literature on the subject. You will be even better read if you read unedited primary sources concerning him...

I trust smiles as much as I trust God. Wait...is this the wrong thread?

While I read like crazy most of the time, I wouldn't call myself "well read." Most of the time, "I'm well read" is synonymous with "I'm a self-important tosser." Jerks took an old term for reading more than one type of work and turned it into a way to inflate their egos.

And don't get your hopes up for certification as "well read." I haven't seen anyone get a reward for reading since I was in sixth grade. Read for the fun of using your brain, not awards or to brag.

Being well read means reading....no acceptance criteria for volume or subject matter that I know of......therefore, one can be "well read" and still be quite ignorant.

"I read a lot!"

--William Boyd, while playing Hopalong Cassidy



"I read things that prove to me that I'm right!"

--Patrice LaBamba, African Dictator and back-up dancere



"I read the titles, memorize the authors' names and then drop that info into conversations that I start, thus establishing my bona fides: that I'm worthy of being put out to stud."

--Elder Olddog, back in the day

Being well read means that a person has some understanding and has studied what's important in life, the purpose of life, what makes a happy society. To understand something about the history of our nation, the way of life that the founding fathers envisioned for future generations. What our duty as Americans is from the past.

If a populace is informed, through being well read, then their behaviors will based on sound reason, and moral decisions.

Sadly we are currently seeing the opposite, the ignorant seem to have the loudest voice on tv news today, the agitators wanting to tear down society without a sound alternative in the plans.

Yet you think universities are a waste of time, and should be cut off at the knees.

FWIW, "lecture" comes from the Latin verb "to read".

And you consider mathematics largely a waste of time, even though the Babylonians at least 3,850 years ago had figured out how to calculate the square root of two, and the quadratic formula, I am pretty confident you have no clue why they thought that was important. Neither do most other people, but that doesn't mean the Babylonians didn't have a sense of why it mattered. They left written records about it.

In medieval universities, there were 7 traditional liberal arts, the name liberal derived from what every free (libre) person should know. Five of the seven were mathematical (music theory, geometry, number theory (i.e. fancy arithmetic), astronomy and logic). The other two were grammar and rhetoric.

macaRomney Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Being well read means that a person has some
> understanding and has studied what's important in
> life, the purpose of life, what makes a happy
> society.

"Man does not strive for happiness; only the Englishman does that." -Fredrich Nietzsche

Plus, anybody who says they know the purpose of life sees you as a mark or a recruit.

>To understand something about the history
> of our nation, the way of life that the founding
> fathers envisioned for future generations. What
> our duty as Americans is from the past.

I think you have "history" and "propaganda" confused. The fact is, America was nowhere near perfect when it was founded. And anytime historians point out the problems with America in an attempt to get people to discuss and fix said problems, you throw a tantrum and accuse them of being "enemies of freedom."

>
> If a populace is informed, through being well
> read, then their behaviors will based on sound
> reason, and moral decisions.

Being informed sounds wonderful. You should try it, macaRomney.

>
> Sadly we are currently seeing the opposite, the
> ignorant seem to have the loudest voice on tv news
> today, the agitators wanting to tear down society
> without a sound alternative in the plans.

We know ignoramuses are loud; the fact you keep posting about things you know nothing about is evidence of that.

And the "agitators" are the folks who see the flaws in society and want to do something to fix them. They aren't nearly as ignorant as the idiots who plug their ears, close their eyes and shout, "LALALALA! Everything is peachy! LALALA!" You, guy, fit in the latter category at least 99.9% of the time.

In this best of all possible worlds. . .

You'll have to forgive me, Lot's Wife, the only Philosophy course I took in college was "Intro to Ethics." I tried to look up what your reply meant and could only find Leibniz's attempt to explain the Problem of Evil and the "justness" of God. By the way, if there is a god and this is the best world he could make, he may be too incompetent to be worth worshipping. Just wanted to add that.

How far off the mark am I?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2020 03:25AM by ookami.

I was referring to Voltaire's Candide, in which the author ridicules Leibniz (you definitely got the topic right) and his optimistic assumption that natural and other disasters are exactly as they should be in this, the best of all possible worlds.

Candide and his friends go through a series of horrors--natural disasters, war, murder, rape--and their philosopher/teacher Dr. Pangloss insists time and again, like Leibniz, that ours is the perfect world and that what happens in it is accordingly for the best.

The ineluctable Panglossian optimism; the refusal to consider ugly alternatives to religious faith, one's own optimism, even one's grasp of truth--these come close to the willful ignorance you outline and to the faith that God wills the tragedies in our lives in order to give us opportunities for growth or reward.

Panglossianism is a form of egocentrism that enables the individual to avoid the tough questions we all face. It is self-delusion and dishonesty in the face of facts.

Thank you!

A pleasure. I love discussing things with you.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2020 03:15AM by Lot's Wife.

If I see “well-read” on a résumé I say...”nope.”

I was "well bred"(pedigree) for Mormonism, underfed, misled, and lost my head due to being "well read."

It isn't a positive thing in Mormonism.

Well
I
read it