Linux

Is bash ultimately better than dolphin or another file manager?

1. Yes. (Disclaimer, some statements contain opinion.)

2. OP was specifically asking how to learn more about Linux. And it's nearly unquestionable that OP is going to learn more about how Linux works if they use the lower-level tools rather than take-you-by-the-hand point-and-click-adventure programs your grandmother could probably figure out.

I always thought that it just seamed slow having to read things out with no icons and having to type the filename instead of double clicking.

So, again, this is just me spouting my own preferences here, but I don't often touch the mouse. Moving my hand from keyboard to mouse takes time. I can use a keyboard shortcut to open a terminal, cd into the proper directory (using tab complete and set -o vi to make things quicker still), and start dealing with files much quicker than I could navigate a menu to get to, say, Dolphin, wait for it to load (if you use a minimal terminal, it should load basically instantaneously), and then start navigating.

And I have been avoiding installing applications through terminal because I can't find how to properly uninstall them including all data (the fedora software center does this really easily)

Not sure I can help you there. I've never used Fedora. I used CentOS once for a short time, but it was a long time ago and I basically don't remember it at all.

I have also had some trouble going further back that my user folder in the terminal I still havn't figured out how to do that.

Like, to the parent directory of your home directory? cd .. should always go to the parent directory of your current working directory. (/ is its own parent, I believe, so you can't go any further up the chain than that.)

Lastly what are some "user friendly by virtiue of having few moving parts" distro's that you recommend?

Gentoo and Arch. I've never used Void, but it sounds to me like Void is very minimal (has few moving parts) while also being much less of a learning curve than Gentoo and Arch.

When I say "few moving parts", I mean, roughly speaking, fewer lines of source code. KDE (just for instance) is a huge beast. It tries to accomplish user friendliness by adding layers upon layers of abstraction, in the process obscuring what's really going on at lower levels from the user. It... doesn't really work. What it gains you in reduced learning curve becomes an obstacle the moment something goes wrong or you want to peek under the hood. Ubuntu (just as another example) installs tons of stuff to try to shield you from the nitty gritty details. But again, that causes more problems than it solves unless you're dead set against ever looking under the hood for any reason.

The term "user friendly" tends to mean "my grandmother can use it without having to learn anything in the process." In the comment about "user friendly by virtiue of having few moving parts", I didn't mean "user friendly" in the same sense. I don't think "user friendly" in the more common sense id mutually exclusive with "fewer moving parts." At least not in theory. But in practice, that does seem to be the trend.