Very uncharitable and questionable on a few levels. Every human exists in context of society, no human exists standalone—the very definition of self, as in self-awareness, has the existence of other as a prerequisite. People you see are perfectly aware of themselves; it’s just that awareness of yourself does not mean you have to violate societal norms and show how individual you are all the time—at best, it requires a more acute awareness of norms (you have to know what to violate first, cf. all the various counter-cultures), making one more socially integrated and in some ways paradoxicay less individual; at worst (if you are properly disconnected) it makes one less of a human, not more.

▲

bwfan123 7 hours ago | parent [-]

> People you see are perfectly aware of themselves

Are they rote-students imitating or copying memes and as such are driven by inadequate-ideas or are they students who understand the subject from its first assumptions and as such are driven by adequate-ideas. In the quote above, the suggestion is that majority are rote-students.

	▲	strogonoff 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		There’s a lot of ground between “imitate” and “understand the subject from its first assumptions”. Arguably, the former is how all learning happens at first. We imitate to get a taste for it and start enjoying it (humans are mirrors), then we can dig deeper if we become sufficiently interested. You can hardly become truly interested in music if you are presented with all the music theory up front and don’t get to have fun playing the instrument; same with math. Even if someone never becomes sufficiently interested to dig deeper into some academic subject and sticks to imitating, I wouldn’t say they are somehow worse and have no awareness. They may have other interests and joys in life, there’s many fulfilling things outside academia. Why would you expect everybody to be like you?