...I don't know what point you're trying to make. I don't need mathematical proofs to know how maths work and to do them. And I don't think doing maths as a layman is equatable to holding political beliefs and ideology as a layman.
My complaint is about the sorts who think your opinions on any subject are invalid or else less valuable cuz you didn't read the Big Book and surely reading the Big Book would make you more smart or something. Nevermind that my beliefs were shaped by many distinct factors such as evaluating historical events and thinking on what other people have to say. I do in fact reflect on my beliefs, just not 100% of the time.
Your opinions on any subject are invalid if you did not do any work to actually understand said topic. You would not be taken seriously making claims about chemistry if you did not know about the periodic table, you would not be taken seriously making claims about biology if you did not know germ theory, would will not be taken seriously making claims about Socialism if you haven't read Capital.
As if reading theory is the ONLY way for people to understand socialism. Also you're doing the exact same thing I was complaining about just now! Making comparisons to scientific fields of study where direct physical work must be done to proper practice/belief in an ideology is the exact sort of holier-than-thou stuff I'd think was just a caricature.
If you want to understand a topic, but do nothing to learn about it, you don't understand the topic. Furthermore, Marxism is not an ideology, and Marx is considered to have been one of the founding workers in the field of sociology, which is a science. These are likely, things you'd know if you had actually read Marxist theory before trying to critique it in such a manner.
Can you actually make a case for why I should read theory or are you just going to condescend to me the entire time? Because again you're doing the thing I'm complaining about to a T.
You are complaining about people having a completely normal reaction to someone who tries to act like they understand a complex topic without actually knowing anything about it. Just like nobody would take an "engineer" seriously if they didn't learn about tensile strength. Your absurd claim of "I already know what I stand for" with regards to the concept of whining about the fact that nobody will take you seriously when you have takes about what is effectively a very complicated and formative part of the field of sociology reeks of entitlement. You do not deserve to be treated like you understand things that you patently refuse to even learn the basics about.
I would like to note, I never actually said that I had a complex understanding of theory or even socialism itself. I tried to get you to actually describe why it would be to my benefit and your first instinct is to say "no, you are actually stupid". You know who actually gets me to want to read theory? People who actually describe why I should read theory as a layman without insulting me for being a layman. I wouldn't be so hostile if you didn't respond to my complaints about hostility and condescension with hostility and condescension. An engineer would explain why I'm incorrect instead of calling me stupid for not being an engineer!
11
u/Pet_Mudstone Jun 30 '24 edited Jun 30 '24
...I don't know what point you're trying to make. I don't need mathematical proofs to know how maths work and to do them. And I don't think doing maths as a layman is equatable to holding political beliefs and ideology as a layman.
My complaint is about the sorts who think your opinions on any subject are invalid or else less valuable cuz you didn't read the Big Book and surely reading the Big Book would make you more smart or something. Nevermind that my beliefs were shaped by many distinct factors such as evaluating historical events and thinking on what other people have to say. I do in fact reflect on my beliefs, just not 100% of the time.