>"Those who know do not speak. Those who speak do not know."> - Lao Tzu
>>42224942
one of the top 3 dumbest sayings of all timeif everyone who knew anything worth a damn never spoke we'd still be living in grass huts and thinking the earth is flat
>>42224971eat ze vugs
>>42224942>... do not say (so)>... Those whom talk [idly] do not know [not to say so]Casting pearls before swine is silly. Fatten them up, then eat them.
>>42224971Are you serious? He isn't literally telling one to keep his mouth shut. He's emphasizing how listening and absorbing information without comment can be as enlightening as discussing it. Ancient literature was inherently way more esoteric than modern writing. They used way more allegories and metaphors, and expected readers to understand this. That's why even "history" in ancient times was written with a lot of flowery language and mythological references.
>>42224971This is why I hate when people use the word "autist" affectionately. Autism is deeply evil, the aversion to vagueness is of the Devil.
>>42225084>He's emphasizing how listening and absorbing information without comment can be as enlightening as discussing itHe didn't say any of that, it's just your weird interpretation based on fucking nothing. Listen to you. You're no different than some modern art fag talking about the profound social commentary concealed in a blank canvas. >Ancient literature was inherently way more esoteric than modern writingOr, you know, they just sucked at communication?I'll take any modern writer over this cryptic asian shit where you're supposed to spend 50 years on a mountaintop meditating on what's the sound of one hand clapping. The modern writer will just tell you his ideas straight up.
>>42225177>The modern writer will just tell you his ideas straight up.And you will learn nothing.
>>42225177That's my point though. Modern writing is the way it is because we have a concept of universal literacy. That's a good thing. I'm not arguing that the ancient way was superior. I'm just saying that assuming you could read (beyond just the relevant amount needed for basic tasks in your profession) you were pretty much a scholar by definition whether you were a part of the priestly or aristocratic classes. It wasn't difficult for these people to understand. The writing was clear as day because they understood the subtext and references and the writers knew the readers would. Yeah, it's an inferior way of passing down information, but the ancients didn't "suck at communication".
>>42225186t. never reads books
>>42225207Interesting theory.
>>42225198Well, there is always the other way...
