By God we're dumb.
- Thread starter Hey Joe
- Start date
Yes maybe the I-gen (internet Generation) is Dumb. But The older generation has a real problem about blaming others. Maybe if this guy spent less time writing hate books and more time teaching the i-gen they would know more. Yes, 22 year olds should know about the cuban Missle Crisis. This is the same type of thing with parents saying GTA is ruinning their kids. Maybe GTA is bad, but as parents they have the duty to teach kids right and wrong and watch what THEIR children do. As adults they have a duty to teach the teenagers things they didn't know and as teenagers, they have a duty to listen.
I remember when my father would tell me not do something because it would fail. It only made me want to do it more. (Who am I kidding, I still act like that) The older generation simply wants to stop the younger generation from making the same mistakes. The younger generation wants to, and this is paraphrasing every young person in America, "do what I want." Is this guy a bit pretentious? Sure. Is he actively trying to seek the utter destruction of freedom and happiness for teens? I'm going to go with no. Recognize this article for what it is; a challenge. This is a well educated individual with alot of life experience teaching and shaping kids just like us, and he is saying he is worried. The least we could do is listen...Or we could tell him how wrong he is because we've been in complete control of our lives up to this point and should avoid rexamining our lifestyles if at all possible.
Just my humble opinion.
Just my humble opinion.
Dude, I've got news for you. Kids in my high school said the same damned thing to me for the same damned reason. In 1985.Castrate the Heathen said:
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
I read Nikomikiri's post and I have to say i agree. Now days Kids get no "outside time" to let out energy at school and if a teacher tells a kid the way it is (that they are stupid and slow everyone else down and if they don't listen they will fail at life) They get fired. So they never learn any thing because they are to busy throwing paperairplanes, they slow the whole class down, the teacher has to reapet everything 20 times and waste time making empty threats to the class clown and the class does not learn as much as they could in a day, making them stupider. so chew on that when it comes time to make your next book, Mr. i-gen Hater.
I went through the whole thread without expecting to come across that term. I had wanted to use that.John Galt said:
Anyway, I've become tired of the many threads that say that most people are dumb. I like being at this end of the bell curve, and I only get annoyed at the stupids when they're irritable.
Some guy: 'Mr President, did you know that half of all Americans are below average intelligence?'
Eisenhower: 'Hubba jubba- wha?'
If there is a general trend down for knowledge/IQ perhaps we should hold our teachers to a higher standard and pay them more. Unfortunately teaching is a safety job, and in the private sector teachers are paid worse wages. It's not amazing to me that teachers often are regarded as nothing more than idealists, leches or lazy flotsam. I had some good professors and teachers, for which I am happy. However poor interpersonal skills has its own drawbacks... such as talking down to your employers.
I like how he assumes teenagers are stupid. We have hobbies and we're going to pursue the things that interest us the most. I'm a very sociable person. I hang out with people almost all day, everyday. Yet I watch UCBerkeley videos on YouTube. Free full-length college lectures on an assortment of different things for entire semesters. Like Physics and Psychology (my favorites). I even had the Psychology ones on my iPod so I could listen to them when I'm not at the computer.
He brought up history and culture multiple times in his explanation. To me, history is irrelevant. It's interesting, but irrelevant. Culture would be a good thing to know if you travel a lot. Which most of us don't. So personally I can regard it as irrelevant as well. Interesting, but irrelevant. And with our social networking, we can find out about others' cultures simply by meeting people all over the world. I talked to a lot of English at one point and learned a lot of how it's like over in England.
He brought up history and culture multiple times in his explanation. To me, history is irrelevant. It's interesting, but irrelevant. Culture would be a good thing to know if you travel a lot. Which most of us don't. So personally I can regard it as irrelevant as well. Interesting, but irrelevant. And with our social networking, we can find out about others' cultures simply by meeting people all over the world. I talked to a lot of English at one point and learned a lot of how it's like over in England.
He makes half-way points, no real astonishing points. Can you tell me many people over 30 who are able to explain who the enemies were in the first World War? Or how about the war of 1812? Every generation has someone like this. I enjoy my technology. I have an iPod, every console on the face of the Earth (literally I beleive), a facebook, and soon an HDTV, however, I also have Greek Philosophy Books and Kant and Hobbes on my bookshelf. We have lives as teen nowadays. They still had the draft in the 70's and many of these people were shipped off at 18. Not too mention, how many people on this site have gotten jobs based on their knowledge of the past? Is it good for us to be well educated? Of course, is it absolutely necessary to know Plato and Socrates in today's world? I don't believe so. However, how many of us know The President of Nintendo? We know what is relevent to our world just as they knew what was relevent to theirs. Technology is how things are run today. Many of us have been talking about how we need to have face to face skills and get out more. Agreed, I like the exercise and the sun every once and a while, but technology is beginning to keep up with us. We have web cams and video conferences, so I would hope that people stop arguing that we sit with no interaction. Are we dumb, no, do we have different informations, yes. My teachers may know that 50's and 60's, but how many of them understand Gigabytes? Lastly, to an earlier post. I've played FF for my entire life. I have actually looked the Summons up and learned things about the Hindu culture, so games can teach us, indirectly, as long as we are willing to learn about them.
Alrighty, this guy is babbling on in the background as I'm writing this wall of text.
Everything I'm about to assert applies to my situation, and perhaps only my situation? (who knows).
I'm a 22 year old living in Iceland.
His assertion is that without a classic education you are worthless. This is clear from his references to literature, history and so on. Curiously he does not mention the sciences. So his concern seems to be mostly with things that have come and gone, are past, that are...tada...history.
I haven't read this guys book, nor am I particularly interested since he has not endeared himself to me by indirectly calling me untrustworthy (I am under 30).
His reaction is clearly one of phobia. He seems to not be completely aware of the environment of young people, nor what they do in the "internets". Most people in my surroundings use the internet to stay in touch with each other, to express their opinion on things, to research and add to their knowledge, to know about what is happening out in the world.
I'm offended by his assertion that I cannot appreciate literature and art through the internet. He himself is apparently not aware of the wealth of literature found on the web for free and with easy access. Nor is he aware of the artists that come together and syndicate their works be they drawings, music, graphical or whatnot. The internet is a much more efficient medium than any library or museum. His failure to keep up with the times is painfully evident in his comments.
He focuses alot on social networking sites, which I don't use alot personally. However, being from a small nation like Iceland and having friends all over the world (literally) they provide a great way to keep in touch. Did my friends in Sudan manage to build their school? How are my old schoolmates in Chile doing? I wonder what my old roommate is doing in China now? And so on.
He seems like someone that would advocate snail mail because it use to be such a awesome thing.
Back on track.
I agree that education is important. It makes you understand the people around you better if you know history, are aware of politics and such. Tolerance towards people of other races, nations, political and sexual orientation is also directly linked to knowledge. So, in his assertion that knowledge is important I agree with(even though he veils it in vitriol towards young people). But you cannot realistically expect young people to keep up with everything that has come and gone. I doubt Mark Bauerlein knows any physical trade. Does he know how to shoe a horse? To raise a barn? To make chainmail? These are just a few of the skills and knowledges that would have been vital back in the day. So why not know them? At some point knowledge fades out of importance and is instead replaced with skills more relevant to your surroundings. I read quite alot, but most of my reading is done online. Should I limit myself to analogue ways of gaining information and keeping in touch with friends because...he doesn't like it? He gives absolutely no good reason to not use the internet. He only asserts that people are stupid completely ignoring any self criticism.
Lets give a little look at my surroundings and family. My grandfather, as a child, lived in a hut. The walls were mostly stone or packed dirt. There was a grass roof, he lived in the countryside and milked cows, sheared sheep and such. He moved to the city and when the American army took over occupation from the British he'd help his family by stealing cutlery, food and anything else not nailed down from the barracks. Highlights were when the soldiers would give him and his friends candy and there were draconian rules of how the treasure must be split given past endevours and what they had brought to the group. He became a comms officer on fishing ships quite young and later was hired as a radar/comms officer at the now decommisioned U.S. army base here in Iceland.
This is something that went on a very short time ago. Mud walls and theft, and this was the norm! There are much worse stories out there from this time in history. Should I look back glassy eyed and cultivate the skills passed down from my ancestors? Book learning or knowing about the Venetian republic was NOT a priority back then. My father however has inclination similar to Mark in that he prioritizes school learning over almost everything. It is über alles and it is a must that you go to school, get an education and start working ASAP! The generation shift from grandfater -> Father is so huge that I find my generation to be kindof dragging their heels. Yes, social networking is huge, yes reading BOOKS may be declining. Museums and libraries may get fewer visitors but that's seeing such a narrow picture. You have to look at the whole thing to truly understand what is going on. Teenagers are reading fewer books and more e-books, going to fewer museums and logging more hits on sites like "DeviantArt".
It's all a part of being free and living in a prosperous society. I don't "need" to know anything to survive here. Someone with no schooling can get a job, it's not great but it puts food on the table. He can get around, not be immediately excluded from social activities etc. This freedom allows people to pursue their interests and gather the knowledge THEY deem important or necessary. Just because a person hasn't read Edgar Allan Poe doesn't mean they are worthless. Just because someone hasn't been to a museum that doesn't mean they're not able to be productive and engaging citizens.
*shrug*
I'd be lying if I didn't say I know alot of "stupid" people. Alot of them are young, naive, unaware of their surroundings, place too much emphasis on their social life than I think is healthy. They spend all their offnights shitfaced and blackout drunk stumbling around downtown puking their guts out. I disagree with it, but I have no clue if they are more stupid than the previous generation since I WAS NOT THERE! And neither was he there for the generation previous to his. He has no clue about what he's going on about...shit like this just pisses me off and makes me want to go grab my chainmail kit and bend FURIOUSLY!
Anyway...wall of text attacks
The attack was successful.
p.s.
If you are still young (not old like me *qq*) I recommend you try to go to a foreign country as soon as possible and stay there for a while. Enroll in a exchange program, go to a boarding school, anything. Get out of your surroundings, be unable to rely on your established network of family and friends and fend for yourself.
It changed my life, atleast.
Everything I'm about to assert applies to my situation, and perhaps only my situation? (who knows).
I'm a 22 year old living in Iceland.
His assertion is that without a classic education you are worthless. This is clear from his references to literature, history and so on. Curiously he does not mention the sciences. So his concern seems to be mostly with things that have come and gone, are past, that are...tada...history.
I haven't read this guys book, nor am I particularly interested since he has not endeared himself to me by indirectly calling me untrustworthy (I am under 30).
His reaction is clearly one of phobia. He seems to not be completely aware of the environment of young people, nor what they do in the "internets". Most people in my surroundings use the internet to stay in touch with each other, to express their opinion on things, to research and add to their knowledge, to know about what is happening out in the world.
I'm offended by his assertion that I cannot appreciate literature and art through the internet. He himself is apparently not aware of the wealth of literature found on the web for free and with easy access. Nor is he aware of the artists that come together and syndicate their works be they drawings, music, graphical or whatnot. The internet is a much more efficient medium than any library or museum. His failure to keep up with the times is painfully evident in his comments.
He focuses alot on social networking sites, which I don't use alot personally. However, being from a small nation like Iceland and having friends all over the world (literally) they provide a great way to keep in touch. Did my friends in Sudan manage to build their school? How are my old schoolmates in Chile doing? I wonder what my old roommate is doing in China now? And so on.
He seems like someone that would advocate snail mail because it use to be such a awesome thing.
Back on track.
I agree that education is important. It makes you understand the people around you better if you know history, are aware of politics and such. Tolerance towards people of other races, nations, political and sexual orientation is also directly linked to knowledge. So, in his assertion that knowledge is important I agree with(even though he veils it in vitriol towards young people). But you cannot realistically expect young people to keep up with everything that has come and gone. I doubt Mark Bauerlein knows any physical trade. Does he know how to shoe a horse? To raise a barn? To make chainmail? These are just a few of the skills and knowledges that would have been vital back in the day. So why not know them? At some point knowledge fades out of importance and is instead replaced with skills more relevant to your surroundings. I read quite alot, but most of my reading is done online. Should I limit myself to analogue ways of gaining information and keeping in touch with friends because...he doesn't like it? He gives absolutely no good reason to not use the internet. He only asserts that people are stupid completely ignoring any self criticism.
Lets give a little look at my surroundings and family. My grandfather, as a child, lived in a hut. The walls were mostly stone or packed dirt. There was a grass roof, he lived in the countryside and milked cows, sheared sheep and such. He moved to the city and when the American army took over occupation from the British he'd help his family by stealing cutlery, food and anything else not nailed down from the barracks. Highlights were when the soldiers would give him and his friends candy and there were draconian rules of how the treasure must be split given past endevours and what they had brought to the group. He became a comms officer on fishing ships quite young and later was hired as a radar/comms officer at the now decommisioned U.S. army base here in Iceland.
This is something that went on a very short time ago. Mud walls and theft, and this was the norm! There are much worse stories out there from this time in history. Should I look back glassy eyed and cultivate the skills passed down from my ancestors? Book learning or knowing about the Venetian republic was NOT a priority back then. My father however has inclination similar to Mark in that he prioritizes school learning over almost everything. It is über alles and it is a must that you go to school, get an education and start working ASAP! The generation shift from grandfater -> Father is so huge that I find my generation to be kindof dragging their heels. Yes, social networking is huge, yes reading BOOKS may be declining. Museums and libraries may get fewer visitors but that's seeing such a narrow picture. You have to look at the whole thing to truly understand what is going on. Teenagers are reading fewer books and more e-books, going to fewer museums and logging more hits on sites like "DeviantArt".
It's all a part of being free and living in a prosperous society. I don't "need" to know anything to survive here. Someone with no schooling can get a job, it's not great but it puts food on the table. He can get around, not be immediately excluded from social activities etc. This freedom allows people to pursue their interests and gather the knowledge THEY deem important or necessary. Just because a person hasn't read Edgar Allan Poe doesn't mean they are worthless. Just because someone hasn't been to a museum that doesn't mean they're not able to be productive and engaging citizens.
*shrug*
I'd be lying if I didn't say I know alot of "stupid" people. Alot of them are young, naive, unaware of their surroundings, place too much emphasis on their social life than I think is healthy. They spend all their offnights shitfaced and blackout drunk stumbling around downtown puking their guts out. I disagree with it, but I have no clue if they are more stupid than the previous generation since I WAS NOT THERE! And neither was he there for the generation previous to his. He has no clue about what he's going on about...shit like this just pisses me off and makes me want to go grab my chainmail kit and bend FURIOUSLY!
Anyway...wall of text attacks
The attack was successful.
p.s.
If you are still young (not old like me *qq*) I recommend you try to go to a foreign country as soon as possible and stay there for a while. Enroll in a exchange program, go to a boarding school, anything. Get out of your surroundings, be unable to rely on your established network of family and friends and fend for yourself.
It changed my life, atleast.
Isn't this always the argument the previous generation makes against the new generation. At one point it was people who only read the bible vs people who read more than the bible. This argument is a reoccuring struggle as society changes and embraces new thought patterns, practices, and habbits. It does not mean we are getting dumber, fact is we always have been and always will be dumb. Not to qoute a bad movie or anything but the person is smart and people are dumb. Talk to almost anyone regardless of age and really crack into them and im sure you will find what makes them tick, think, and everything they know is quite astounding. However in groups and examined from afar we are how would you say... "pants on head retarded".
Just my two cents
Just my two cents
I don't like the fact that he calls us stupid because we don't know stuff that was relevant during his time. I think the older generation has been calling the younger generation stupid since the dawn of time. I bet during Shakespeare's time older people said the young people going to see Shakespeare's plays while never seeing Oedipus the King in live outdoor theater was a sign that people weren't appreciating the classics.
People who dismiss things just because they are new are same. There feels a distinct disdain for all that is new to learn and do in this guy's speech.sammyfreak said:
Newer generations can't possibly learn all the stuff their parents did, to the degree they did, as well as about computers, various programs, how to use the internet most effectively, using various tech, etc. Moore's Law has shown the processing power of our tech to be doubling every couple of years, which allows more functionality and therefore more complexity in their uses. How many of our parents are as versed and comfortable with computers and other tech as this younger generation?
This lack of knowledge of Shakespeare, while sad, is a reflection of the world in which we live. And kids aren't going to the library these days cuz they're doing research online and ordering books from Amazon.
Also, until we can start paying the educators of these "ignorant and lazy" children what they are worth so top people in their respective fields are teaching the children, I lay less of the blame on the children, than on those people over 40 who put those ridiculous salaries in place.
I think you just proved his points using both poor grammar and assumptions. Come on, show that we have something to defend. Also, you may not need to read about Anthony and Cleopatra, however in doing so, you're enriching your life. While you aren't 'worthless' as this man would claim you are, you're limiting yourself. Like Protocon said in what was probably one of the best first posts ever, getting outside your comfort zone will make your life so much better. Don't get stuck in a rut lest you continue to validate this man's argument that the under 30 crowd has no appreciation of knowledge.saposkus said:
I don't really buy the argument in the video that children have too many distractions now: There have always been distractions for children, and an IPod or a XBox 360 is no more of a distraction than a walkman or a ZX spectrum was in my day, or a record player and a football was in my father's. Certainly reading takes up a smaller proportion of young folk's leisure time; but they also have more leisure time overall, what with not having to spend 27 hours a day working at the pit to earn enough gravel to feed the family for breakfast &c.
Regarding social networking sites: I would say that if the social networking aspect of the internet does have an effect on intelligence, it is a polarising one. If little Timmy decided to social-network with a shower of dunces, then that may make him more stupid. But little Timmy could be social-networking with intelligent people from all over the world who share similar interests, that can only be a good thing for his intelligence; it is certainly a good thing for his experience of other cultures and appreciation for the ideas and principles of people outside his own community.
I think that the internet also has a polarising effect on intelligence. For those who were already keen to learn and receptive to new ideas, the internet offers access to information about every conceivable subject to a level that I wish I'd had while I was at school. For the pupil who just wants to 'wing it' and get a pass mark for his homework with the minimum of effort, however, this same access to information removes some of the necessity to learn things, because often they can just 'Google' them, write down the answers, and then forget them.
So while I think you could blame technology for exacerbating the problem of educating those less inclined to learn, blaming it for making an entire generation stupid is, well, stupid.
Regarding social networking sites: I would say that if the social networking aspect of the internet does have an effect on intelligence, it is a polarising one. If little Timmy decided to social-network with a shower of dunces, then that may make him more stupid. But little Timmy could be social-networking with intelligent people from all over the world who share similar interests, that can only be a good thing for his intelligence; it is certainly a good thing for his experience of other cultures and appreciation for the ideas and principles of people outside his own community.
I think that the internet also has a polarising effect on intelligence. For those who were already keen to learn and receptive to new ideas, the internet offers access to information about every conceivable subject to a level that I wish I'd had while I was at school. For the pupil who just wants to 'wing it' and get a pass mark for his homework with the minimum of effort, however, this same access to information removes some of the necessity to learn things, because often they can just 'Google' them, write down the answers, and then forget them.
So while I think you could blame technology for exacerbating the problem of educating those less inclined to learn, blaming it for making an entire generation stupid is, well, stupid.
Ok, I just skipped the walls of text, so I'll be brief so as not to be hypocritical. Also, I'm English and not stupid. Blunt, but I'm really not.
I wouldn't blame the internet for the drop in standards. I'd blame the education system and the parents first, because really, those two have much more to do with a child's education than the internet does.
It's parental responsibility to make sure a child focusses on their priorities. Education is important for kids, and it should be a parent's duty to do the absolute best they can in thate area to give their kids the best possible chance in later life.
And I might be crazy and make no sense, but a lot of people have difficulty following my train of thought at times. Particularly classmates.
I wouldn't blame the internet for the drop in standards. I'd blame the education system and the parents first, because really, those two have much more to do with a child's education than the internet does.
It's parental responsibility to make sure a child focusses on their priorities. Education is important for kids, and it should be a parent's duty to do the absolute best they can in thate area to give their kids the best possible chance in later life.
And I might be crazy and make no sense, but a lot of people have difficulty following my train of thought at times. Particularly classmates.