Thread 24551380

Are St Augustine's Confessions worth reading if I'm not religious? Pic related.

>>24551380 (OP)
Only if you’re christfag. Otherwise it reads like my diary desu.
>I was a chad in my youth but now I’m a good betabuxxer for Christ
There, I summarized it for you.

For serious scholars of late classical thought Augustine is essential

>>24551380 (OP)
No.

Bloom says yes

>>24551562
How did atheist anons benefit from reading it?

>>24551380 (OP)
You believe in aliens so you're definitely religious

>>24551490
I bet your father beats you

>>24551566
It depends zoom zoom, but unless you are going to Participation Award State University, at a Tier 1 or Tier 2 school it will almost certainly be required of you at some point.

>>24551585
Why do you insult me although I asked you a normal question? How someone struggling with his faith would benefit from reading this I understand, but someone who doesn’t have any faith left and doesn’t believe in God, is not Christian? Doubt it.

>>24551589
Remember when your teacher talked about "learning how to learn" zoomling? Reading Aquinas, Augustine, Moore, Luther, Calvin, Pseudo Dionysus, etc etc. This is "thinking about how to think". You will also probably have to read the Koran, Lotus Sutra, Analects and Lao Tzu despite not being a Muslim, Buddhist, Confucian, or Daoist wizard.

You will never encounter an "educated" person who has not read these thinkers.

>>24551623
If it doesn't touch your soul, it's pointless to read. Reading just for the sake of seeimg educated is pretentious af.

>>24551623
What utterly pointless and dumb advice. There's not a person in history that did anything productive and important who stuffed himself with all this useless information, just because it's le old.
You learn how to think by going deep, not broad.

>>24551625
Well you won't know until you try, will you zoomling?
Go read five pages, if its not to your liking/30 second attention span, move on.

>>24551632
>You learn how to think by going deep, not broad.
Yes and no. Broadness in religious, theological, and wisdom texts is a type of depth. Broadness would be like electrical engineering textbook, Lord of the Rings, and the Qu'ran. Also, the idea that no great person read these is untrue; not having read the Bible and trying to read Western literature (which I did for years) is totally delusional.
>>24551380 (OP)
The book invented auto-biography as we know it, yes.

>>24551660
>not having read the Bible and trying to read Western literature (which I did for years) is totally delusional
Can you elaborate on that? Sure, I'm not denying that the Bible influenced everything that came afterwards. But to enjoy a book, you don't have to read every book that came before and influenced it, no?

>>24551380 (OP)
Have you read Plato?

>>24551660
>not having read the Bible and trying to read Western literature (which I did for years) is totally delusional.

The pretentiousness of the pseuds never ceases to amaze me. The history of literature is not the same thing as literature. Please try and grow up soon.

>>24551380 (OP)
I read it as a non-Christian generally interested in western philosophy. It meant nothing to me religiously or philosophically, as he goes around in circles saying the same praises over and over, but between these bits, you'll find a genuinely nice autobiography, even though it's a bit sporadic. His portions about him mom and friends were nice to read. I only recommend it if you know what I want and are willing to skim over the rest.

>>24551490
>>24551578
lol is there anything else or is it just that? I'm on page 94 and if it's that I'll throw it out to save my time

>>24551380 (OP)
I'm taking your pepe OP

>>24551660
>not having read the Bible and trying to read Western literature (which I did for years) is totally delusional.
lol pseud, start with the greeks

>>24551589
It’s about an intelligent young man struggling with the big questions, anyone with any sense would like and appreciate it.